BX  6195  .A7 

1838 

c.l 

Annan,  Will 

iam, 

1805 

-1882. 

The  difficu 

Ities 

of  . 

Arminian 

Methodism 

f,M--. 


;5r*^5?^«''^J^S^^  ^ 


ERRATA. 

Owin;  to  the  writer's  distance  from  the  press,  a  few 
typographical  errors  have  been  sufFered  to  remain  in  this 
work,  the  most  important  of  which  are  the  following: 

Page  41,  12th   Ime    from  lop,   for    states,  read  "aa 

STATES." 

Page  45,  7th  Ime  from  bottom,  for  reason,  read  evasion. 

Page  71,  4th  line  from  bottom  for  now-elect,  read  non* 
•Uct. 

Page  209,  5th  line  from  bottom  (note)  for  Hearn,**  read 
I^ave. 

Page  327,  loivcst  hne,  for  Discip,  p,  9,  read  Disc,  p.  9. 


THE  DIFFICULTIES 

OF 

ARMINIAN  METHODISM; 

EMBRACING 

Striciiires  on   the    Writings   of  Wesley^  Drs* 
Clarke,  Fish,  Bangs,  and  other s, 

IN  A  SERIES  OF  LETTERS 

ADDRESSED 

TO  THE  REV.  *  *  *  *. 


BY    WIIililAM    ANIVAN. 


The  prejudice  against  religious  controversy  is  irration- 
al and  hurtful.  Dr.  Mason. 

It  may  be  truly  affirmed,  that  the  evils  of  controversy 
are  transient;  the  good  it  produces  is  permanent. 

Rohert  Hall. 


Third  Edition,  revised  and  enlarged  from  the  Seconds 


PITTSBURGH: 

t>UBLISHED  BY  LUKE  LOOMIS. 

Sold  also  by  J.  Whetham,  Philadelphia;  Ezra  Callin, 
New  York;  Burgess  &,  Crane,  Cincinnati. 

1838. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  )'ear 
18:6,  by  Rev.  William  Annan,  in  the  Office  of  the  Clerk 
of  the  District  Court  of  the  Western  District  of  Penn- 
sylvania. 


k^nderson  ^  Loomis,  printen. 


PREFACE. 

SoMKTHiNG  over  a  year  lias  elapsed  sinee  the  writer 
published  the  following'  letters,  being-  a  revised  and  en- 
larged form  of  a  tract  which  had  issued  from  the  press 
some  two  years  previously.  The  author  of  the  work  was 
unknown  to  fame,  nor  did  he  venture  to  suppose  that, 
excepting  the  goodness  of  his  cause,  there  was  aught 
either  in  the  design,  or  the  execution,  adapted  to  win  the 
approbation  of  those  whose  favorable  opinion  it  is  always 
laudable  to  desire,  and  honorable  to  deserve. 

The  events  of  the  past  year,  connected  with  ike  gene- 
ral subject,  and  with  causes  directly  opposed  to  each 
other,  have  encouraged  him  to  prepare  and  publish  a  third 
edition  of  his  little  book,  with  such  enlargements  as  may 
render  it  more  worthy  of  its  title,  and  better  suited  to  tha 
object  in  view.  From  his  ministerial  brethren,  who  are 
known  to  harmonize  with  the  writer  in  theological  senti- 
ment, he  has  received  a  degree  of  countenance,  and  effi- 
cient support,  which  he  had  not  ventured  to  anticipate, 
and  which  may  well  be  supposed  to  be  most  grateful  to 
his  feelings.  And  he  is  happy  to  number  among  those 
whose  kind  sympathy  and  friendly  aid  have  been  received, 
individuals  of  the  wise  and  good,  whose  names  and  influ-- 
ence  are  a  sufficient  passport  to  the  confidence  of  any 
Christian  community. 

But  the  writer  has  also  been  animated  in  the  execu- 
tion of  this  work  by  the  Jcind  of  reception  which  has  been 
awarded  to  himself  and  his  labors,  on  the  part  of  those 
whose  views  and  usages  have  been  especially  the  topics  of 
remark.  It  is  a  fact  familiar  to  all,  that  for  many  years 
the   scheme  of  theological  truth  ccmmonly  called   Cah 


IV  PREFACE. 

vinism,  particularly  as  maintained  by  the  Presbyterian 
church,  has  been  the  object  of  unceasing  and  unmeasured 
hostility,  directed  by  the  clerical  leaders  of  Episcopal 
Methodism.  Every  channel  of  access  to  the  public  mind, 
from  the  elaborate  volume,  and  plausible  tract,  down  to 
the  pulpit  declamation,  and  newspaper  paragraph,  has 
been  put  in  requisition,  to  portray  in  colors  of  the  darkest 
hue  that  hated  system,  and  to  shake  the  deep  foundations 
which  it  has  so  long  and  so  deservedly  held  in  the  public 
esteem  and  approbation.  But  except  so  far  as  truth  and 
candor  were  forgotten  or  invaded  in  the  crusade,  it  was 
regarded  only  as  a  good  illustration  of  that  perfect  free- 
dom, both  in  church  and  state,  which  is  the  glory  of  the 
present  day,  and  of  the  government  under  which  we  claim 
and  enjoy  our  mutual  rights.  With  the  single  exception 
referred  to,  no  one  complained,  and  for  various  reasons, 
almost  no  one  replied. 

After  this  protracted  indulgence,  the  treatise  now  pre- 
sented to  the  public,  made  its  appearance.     And  what- 
ever might  be  thought  of  his  logic,  the  writer  did  suppose 
that  the  exercise  of  a  right  which  had  been  so  liberally 
employed  by  our  Methodist  friends,  would  be  freely  con- 
ceded to  otiiers.     Judge  then  of  his  surprise  and  regret  on 
discovering  that  he  would  be  met,  not  with  sober  argu- 
ment, to  correct  his  supposed  errors,  but  with  a  volley  of 
abuse,  for  which  it  is  not  easy  to  find  a  suitable  parallel. 
With  one  thing,  however,  he  has  reason  to  be  satisfied: 
He  has  thus  obtainsd  from  a  source  the  least  likely  to  fur- 
nish  it,  an  involuntary  admission  that  his  work  has  not 
been  altogether  like  the  sliaft  of  Priam— "feZwm  imbelle 
sine  ictuy     The  dart  of  the  feeble  old  monarch  did  not 
kmdle  the  ire,  or  provoke  the  denunciations  of  him  against 


PREFACE.  ▼ 

whom  it  was  directed.  Its  weak  and  ineffectual  stroke 
excited  rather  the  derision  than  the  anger  of  the  foe. 

It  is  not  intended  to  offer  any  justification  of  the 
publication  of  these  letters,  further  than  may  be  found  in 
the  work  itself,  particularly  in  the  introductory  letter, 
and  the  appendix.  Every  impartial  person  who  will  givo 
the  volume  a  perusal,  will,  it  is  believed,  be  fully  per- 
suaded that  something  of  the  kind  was  imperiously  de- 
manded, under  existing  circumstances.  In  this  convic- 
tion,  the  writer  is  happy  to  have  the  concurrence  of  sorao 
of  the  wisest  and  best  men  of  the  land.*  "We  would 
respectfully  entreat  Presbyterians,"  remarks  the  venera- 
ble Dr.  Green,  "who  think  and  say  that  it  were  better  not 
to  expose  the  objectionable  practices  of  the  Methodists, 
to  consider  the  insidious  nature  of  error,  both  in  doctrino 
and  practice.  It  almost  always  comes  in  by  slow  ad- 
vances, and  is  always  most  dangerous  when  it  is  asso» 
ciated  with  something  commendable,  especially  with  ap. 
parent  zeal."  Such,  too,  were  the  precept  and  practice 
of  the  inspired  apostles,  and  also  of  their  Master,  whose 
life  was  employed  in  exposing  error  and  delusion,  and 
establishing  the  principles  of  righteousness  and  truth;  and 
that,  too,  in  direct  conflict  with  those  who  were  the  wor- 
shippers of  the  true  God,  and  whose  zeal  would  compas* 
sea  and  land  to  make  one  proselyte  to  what  they  believed 
to  be  important  to  the  interests  of  true  religion. 

It  is  proper  further  to  state,  that  the  painful  and  hu- 
miliating exposure  which  has  been  made  of  the  policy 
pursued  by  Methodism,  does  not  apply  to  the  laity  of  that 

*  See  particularly  Dr.  Alexander's  letter,  on  anothw 
page. 

1* 


VI 


PREFACE. 


•ommunion.  The  travelling  preachers  have  constituted 
themselves  the  sole  depository  of  ecclesiastical  power  ; 
and  to  them,  as  the  authors,  belongs  the  exclusive  merit 
or  reproach  which  may  attach  to  the  measures  adopted 
by  that  body.  In  the  language  of  their  founder,  speaking 
ecclesiastically,  ''they  are  no  republicans,  and  never  in- 
tend  to  be.  It  were  better  for  those  who  are  so  minded, 
to  go  quietly  away^  Accordingly,  the  people  are  ex- 
eluded  entirely  from  the  administration  of  affairs,  and 
are  required  to  receive  at  the  hand  of  their  clerical  supe- 
riors, whatever  measure  they  may  choose  to  mete  to  tl)em. 
We  cannot  hold  the  laity  responsible  for  the  offensive  and 
unchristian  proceedings  referred  to,  since  the  preachers 
have  forbidden  them  to  have  any  part  or  lot  in  the 
matter. 

It  is  only  necessary  to  add,  that  in  preparing  this 
edition,  the  Methodist  authorities  before  cited  have  been 
re-examined  with  much  care,  and  with  deepened  convic- 
tions, confirmed  by  numerous  other  references,  that  the 
most  entire  justice  has  been  done  to  the  cause  of  Ar- 
minianism.  If  there  still  are  errors  in  the  book,  they 
are  such  as  have  escaped  the  anxious  and  conscientious 
diligence  of  the  writer,  and  which  he  will  cheerfully  cor- 
rect, whenever  convinced  of  their  existence. 

October  IQth,  1837. 


RECOM  M  END  ATIONS. 

The  following  are  a  few,  among  many,  recommenda- 
tions, which  the  author  and  publisher  have  received. 

From  the  Rev.  Dr.  Alexander. 

Rev.  VV.  Annan: 

Dear  Sir — I  have  read  v/ith  much  approbation  your 
little  v/ork,  entitled,  "The  Difficulties  of  Arrainiaii 
Methodism."  So  far  as  the  discussion  of  doctrinal  points 
is  concerned,  I  think  tlic  subject  has  been  treated  in  a 
fair  and  masterly  manner.  Tlic  book  should  be  widely 
circulated  in  our  church;  and  I  am  disposed  to  aid  in 
bringing  it  into  notice.  But  although  I  am  of  opinion 
that  the  argumentative  part  of  the  work  is  admirably 
conducted,  there  are  some  things  which,  if  removed, 
would  improve  the  volume.*  I  am  persuaded,  however, 
from  the  facts  which  you  have  stated,  that  such  a  defence 
against  the  ungenerous  attacks  of  many  assailants,  was 
called  fur,  and  will  effectually  subserve  the  promotion  of 
evangelical  truth.— Respectfully  Yours,  &c. 

A.  ALEXANDER. 
Princeton,  N.  J.,  July  8,  1837. 


*  Dr.  Alexander,  in  another  part  of  his  letter,  makes  a 
number  of  valuable  suggestions,  of  which  the  author  has 
availed  himself  in  this  edition. 


Vlll  RECOMMliNDATIONS. 

From  the  Biblical  Repertortj,  for  July,  1837. 
"The  autlior  has,  by  this  production  of  his  pen,  proved 
himself  to  be  a  workman  that  need  not  be  ashamed. 
Whoever  vi^ishes  to  see  the  objections  commonly  made  by 
Arminians  to  the  Calvinistic  system,  fairly  rolled  back  on 
their  own,  will  find  satisfaction  in  the  perusal  of  this 
work." 


From  the  Rev.   George  W.  Musgrave,  pastor  of  the  2d 

Preshyterian  church,  Baltimore. 

Dear  Sir — I  was  rejoiced  to  see  the  second  edition  of 

your  Difficulties  of  Methodism,  and  still  niore  so,  to  learn 

that  you  intend  to  issue   a  third  edition.     It  was  quite 

time  that  the   slanders  and  gross  misrepresentations  of 

that  denomination  should  be  repelled  and  exposed.     You 

have  "used  them  up"  handsomely, and  deserve  the  thanks 

of  all  who  love  truth,  honesty,  honor,  and  rational  piety. 

I  hope  you  will  go  on;  and  if  I  can  aid  you  in  any  way  in 

the  circulation  of  your  useful  book,  I  will  cheerfully  do  so. 

Yours  affectionately, 

G.  W.  MUSGRAVE. 
Rev.  W.  Annan. 


F.om  an  editorial  notice  in  the  Presu.lerian  of  Oct.  29/A, 
by  Rev.  Wm.  Englcs. 
Mr.  Annan  was  induced  to  undertdke  this  work  in  self, 
defence.  The  Methodist  denomination  have  surpassed 
all  others  in  the  boldness  of  their  attacks  on  Calvinistic 
Presbyterianism,  and  this  too  in  their  authorized  tracts, 
which  arc  carefully  circulated  in  Presbyterian  neighbor- 


RECOMMENDATIONS.  IX 

hoods.  Mr.  Annan  had  been  an  eye-witness  of  the  evil 
of  this  practice,  and  was  perfectly  justifiable  in  his  pre. 
sent  attempt  to  counteract  it.  The  author  and  his  book 
have  been  assailed  with  great  violence  in  some  of  the 
Methodist  Journals ;  but  we  can  see  no  reason  for  their 
wrath,  in  the  temper  or  style  in  which  the  difficulties  of 
•  Arminian  Methodism  are  pourtrayed.  In  truth,  Mr.  A. 
has  furnished  a  f>opular  treatise,  which  cannot  easily  be 
answered.  He  has  carried  the  war  into,  the  enemy^s  ter- 
ritory, and  has  put  those  on  the  defensive  who  have  hith- 
erto considered  it  their  right  to  act  on  the  offensive.  We 
have  no  unfriendly  feelings  towards  the  Methodists;  but 
where  they  will  make  their  incursions  on  Presbyterian 
congregations,  we  advise  the  assailed  to  procure  and  cir- 
culate Mr.  Annan's  book.. 


From  the  Rev.  Joshua  Moore,  of  Mifflin  county,  Pa. 

Dear  Brother — I  have  finished  the  perusal  of  your  work 
upon  Arminian  Methodism,  and  in  truth  and  candor,  I 
found  it  excellent.  Almost  the  only  fault  I  discovered 
was  its  extreme  brevity.  Not  only  do  I  feel  free  to  com- 
mend its  matter  and  style,  but  its  spirit.  You  indulge  a 
little  in  irony,  but  it  seems  to  me  no  infringement  upon 
the  law  of  neighborly  love,  since  your  design  is  not  so 
much  to  be  humorous  at  the  expense  of  the  feelings  of 
others,  as  to  expose  errors  which  cannot  always  be  reached 
by  mere  logic.  Your's  is  not  a  superfluous  work,  but 
subservient  to  the  salvation  of  souls,  and  the  glory  of  God 


X  RKCOMMENUATIONS. 

I  bid  you,  therefore,  God  speed,  and  shall  take  pleasure 
in  giving  your  work  circulation  among  my  people. 
Your  friend  and  rdlow-laborcr, 

JOSHUA  MOORE. 
Rev.  W.  Annan. 


From  the  Pittshvrgh  Christian  Herald,  for  Oct.  lith. 

Altliough  our  autlior,  in  the  first  instance,  stood  on  the 
defensive,  stili,  as  the  war  was  begun  by  his  opposers,  his 
successful  dcvelopcnicnt  of  the  difiiculties  of  the  Arminian 
sj'stem,  is  not  only  higlily  reasonable,  but  just  and  expe- 
dient. It  is  high  time  the  Presbyterian  church  should 
understand  the  weak  points  of  Methodism;  and  I  honestly 
aver,  that  I  know  of  no  little  volume  so  well  adapted,  on 
the  whole,  to  give  the  necessary  information.  Most 
treatises  on  the  general  subject  are  too  prolix  for  ordinary 
readers.  But  in  this  little  volume,  the  style  is  too  popular 
and  sprightly,  the  argument  too  pointed  and  concise,  to 
permit  even  tlie  possibility  of  tedium  in  the  most  drowsy 
reader.  Calvinists  will  here  find  the  difficulties  of  Ar- 
minian Methodism  strongly,  fairly,  and  yet  succinctly 
stated;  and  perhaps  no  where  else  can  any  thing  be  found 
so  convenient,  portable,  neatly  executed,  and  popularly 
written;  so  well  adapted  to  strengthen  their  confidence  in 
their  own  system,  and  guard  them  against  the  unfounded 
cluinis  of  self-conceited  Arminians. 


Ma.  LooMis : — I  have  perused,  with  as  much  care,  as 
my  limited  time  would  permit,  the  work  of  Mr.  Annan, 


RECOMMENDATIONS.  XI 

which  you  placed  iu  my  hands,  a  few  days  ago,  entitled 
"  The  Difficulties  of  Arminian  Methodism."  The  work 
is  well  executed.  The  author  has  presented  the  difficul- 
ties  of  the  system  which  he  assails,  in  a  clear  and  forcible 
manner.  The  radical  authorities  which  he  has  intro- 
duced, greatly  enhance  the  value  of  the  work.  Some  of 
these,  his  opponents  cannot  disown,  and  will,  doubtless, 
be  slow  to  controvert.  Those  who  are  so  fond  of  exhib- 
iting the  difficulties  of  Calvinism,  will  here  find  room  for 
the  trial  of  their  skill  in  settling  the  difficulties  of  their 
own  system.  The  work  is  cheerfully  recommended  to 
the  patronage  of  an  intelligent  christian  public. 
Yours,  sincerely, 

D.  ELLIOTT. 
Alleghenytown,  May  7,  1838. 

For  a  number  of  years  the  Presbyterian  church  has 
been  assailed  on  every  side ;  and  by  none  other  with 
greater  violence  than  brethren  of  the  Methodist  church. 
Instances  of  successful  defence  were  not  altogether  want- 
ing; but  they  were  of  an  ephemeral  character,  and  passed 
away  with  the  polemics  of  the  time  when  they  appeared. 
The  course  which  the  author  of  this  book  has  adopted, 
has  given  a  momentum  as  well  as  a  permanency  to  his 
effisrt  quite  beyond  what  the  others  attained.  It  was 
wise  to  carry  the  war  into  the  territory  of  the  assailants, 
and  this  Mr.  Annan  has  done  with  ability  and  success. 
I  cordially  approve  of  the  improvements  made  in  this  edi- 
tion, so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  compare  them  with  the 
former,  and  cheerfully  join  in  recommending  it  to  the 
€hri«-tian  public. 

T.  D.  BAIRD. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


LETTER   I. 

Introductory  Kemarks.  Circumstances  which  gave  rise 
to  the  work.  Undertaken  iu  self-dclence.  iMisreprc- 
sentations  of  our  Doctrines  on  the  part  of  Methodism. 
Slanderous  imputations  of  her  Tracts,  authorized  by 
the  General  Conference.  "Dialogue  between  a  Pre- 
destinarian  and  his  Friend."  "Duplicity  Exposed," 
&c.  Closing  Reflections.  This  Assault  on  the  part 
of  the  Conference,  unprovoked,  and  if  successful,  could 
not  promote  True  Religion.  Refuted  by  their  own 
admissions.  Specimens  of  Practical  Methodism. 
Postscript — pp.  17 — 46. 

LETTER  II. 

Difficulties  on  the  subject  of  Original  Sin.  Methodist 
Article.  The  Book  of  Discipline  is  silent  on  the 
Question  of  the  Avithor  of  Sin.  The  Preachers  and 
private  Members  may  hold  and  teach  that  God  is  its 
Author,  and  stil)  be  good  Methodit-ts.  Their  Doc- 
trinal System  admits  and  maintains  Unavoidable  Sin. 
Dr,  Fisk  on  the 'Subject.  Man  a  Sinner  by  Grace. 
The  Gospel  the  Cause  of  all  the  Sin  in  the  World. 
Strange  Inconsistencies  of  the  Scheme  of  Dr.  Fisk, 
and  Richard  Watson.  God  is  represented  as  the 
Author  of  all  Sin.  Men  and  devils  sin,  and  are  pun- 
ished only  by  Grace.  According  to  tlic  Methodist 
Scheme,  little  Children  are  objects  of  God's  wrath, 
and  in  danger  of  eternal  perdition.  According  to 
Methodism,  no  Infant  can  be  saved!  Important  Ad- 
missions of  Watson  and  Wesloy — pp.  47 — 78. 


CONTENTS.  Xlll 

LETTER    III. 

Difficulties  of  Methodism  in  reference  to  Divine  Fore- 
knowledge, as  connected  with  the  doctrine  of  Predes- 
tination. Wesley's  important  Concession.  The  Ar- 
minian  Scheme  cannot  be  shown  to  be  consistent  with 
Human  Liberty,  by  the  admission  of  its  Advocates. 
Absurd  Views  of  Man's  Freedom  entertained  by 
Methodists.  An  act  of  will  precedes  the  Jirst  act. 
The  Soul  chooses  without  choice,  &c.  vfce.  Arminian 
Liberty  irreconcilable  \vith  the  Foreknowledg-e  of 
God.  The  Book  of  Discipline  recognises  no  such 
attribute.  Dr.  Adam  Clarke's  wretched  attempt  to 
escape  from  the  Difficulties  of  the  Subject.  Dr. 
Fisk's  Evasion.  Statement  of  undeniable  Truth. 
True  doctrine  of  Predestination.  The  Difficulties  of 
Foreknowledge  equally  numerous  and  great.  The 
inquiry,  "Why  does  Sin  exist?"  Calvinistic  doctrine 
of  Divine  Permission,  exhibited  in  the  Presbyterian 
Confession.  Modern  Methodism  teaches  that  God 
would  have  prevented  man's  sin,  but  could  not.  Dr. 
Bangs,  and  R.  Watson,  on  the  subject.  All  might 
justly  have  been  left  to  perish  in  sin — otherwise, 
grace  is  no  more  grace,  but  debt.  Scripture  doctrine 
of  Election.  Absurd  consequences  of  the  opposite 
view.  Renders  prayer  for  the  salvation  of  sinners 
useless  and  unmeaning,  except  addressed  to  the  sin- 
ner, and  not  to  God.  Reprobation.  Dr.  Fisk's  mis- 
representations exposed.  Sectarian  artifice,  in  refe- 
rence to  alleged  diffi^rences  between  ancient  and 
modern  Calvinism.  Sentiments  of  Turretine.  De- 
fence of  certain  passages  of  the  Presbyterian  Confes- 
sion. Reprobation,  a  Methodist  doctrine.  Postscript. 
Defence  of  Calvin  in  the  case  of  Servetus — pp.  79 — 
132. 

LETTER  IV. 

Difficulties  in  connection   with  Atonement.     Methodist 
article  teaches  Universalism.     Is  at  variance  with  the 


XIV  CONTENTS. 

essential  nature  of  Atonement.  Airays  the  designs 
ana  purposes  of  God  against  each  other.  Important 
Concession  by  Watson.  True  hing-e  of  the  contro- 
versy, the  de.^iirf}  or  intention  of  Christ  in  dying  for 
sinners,  not  the  intrinsic  value  of  his  sacrifice.  Scrip- 
tures teach  a  limitation  of  tiic  former,  not  of  the  latter. 
God  has  not  been  disp.ppointed.  'Falling  from  Grace.' 
Strange  Results  of  the  doctrine.  Contrasted  with  the 
explicit  Declarations  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Impious 
statements  of  Wesley,  in  reference  to  God's  covenant. 
The  Arminian  View  of  Atonement  represents  the 
Divine  Being  as  both  cruel  and  unjust.  True  doc- 
trine. Answer  to  Objections.  God  not  Partial,  «Scc. 
DiiHculties  upon  tlie  subject  of  Regeneration.  Im- 
mense importance  of  tliis  topic.  Delusive  modes  of 
presenting  it.  Absurd  notion  of  Grace.  God  needs 
the  sinner's  "good  leave,"  before  he  can  convert  or 
sanctiiy  hiai.  Striking  extracts  from  President  Ed- 
wards on  Religious  Affections — pp.  133 — 172. 

LETTER  V. 

DifTiculties  on  the  subject  of  Sinless  Perfection.  Admit- 
ted by  Wesley  to  be  a  feature  of  Pelagian  ism.  Tho 
doctrine,  when  fairly  stated,  refutes  itnelf  Scheme 
of  Fletcher.  Involves  the  licentious  features  of  Anti- 
nomianism,  by  abrogating  the  moral  law,  and  redu- 
cing the  requirements  of  Heaven  to  a  level  with  the 
sinner's  convenience.  Its  contradiction  to  the  Scrip- 
tures proved.  Opposition  of  Clarke  to  \V"esley.  Their 
futile  reasoning  in  defence  of  the  doctrine.  Difficul- 
ties in  reference  to  t!ie  evidences  of  a  genuine  work 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Jumping,  shouting,  laughing,  &C., 
not  true  evidences.  The  preaching  of  Christ  and  his 
apostles,  not  followed  by  sucli  exercises.  Singular 
attempt  to  enlist  the  Bible  in  their  fiivor.  Decided 
testimony  of  the  Fathers,  and  best  friends  of  Method- 
ism, against  such  exhilntions.  .John  Wesley,  Cha'« 
Wesley,  Mr.  Fletcher,  Dr.  A.  Clarke.  J.  Wesley  vp. 
Female  Exhorters,  &c.— pp.  173—201. 


CONTENTS.  XV 

LETTER    VI. 

Bifficulties  in  relation  to  Camp  Meetings,  and  Abuses  of 
Religious  ordinances.  Reasons  for  discountenancing 
Methodist  Camp  Meetings.  Not  the  Scriptural  me- 
thod of  making  men  holy,  but  of  the  contrary  ten- 
dencies. Interesting  extracts  from  the  Christian  Ad- 
vocate, edited  by  Dr.  Green.  Erroneous  views  of  the 
design  of  Preaching.  Little  value  set  upon  instruc- 
tion in  Religious  Truth.  Perverted  Taste  for  Noisy 
Preaching,  Improper  notions  of  Divine  Truth.  Ex- 
ample of  catching  and  killing  the  devil  in  a  Prayer 
meeting.  Tendency  to  produce  Infidelity.  Difficul- 
ties on  the  subject  of  Religious  ordinances.  Baptism 
profaned  by  admitting  improper  subjects.  Testimony 
of  Wesley  and  Watson.  Baptism  of  the  Infants  of 
the  immoral  and  profane,  sets  the  seal  of  Heaven  to  a 
blank,  or  an  untruth.  The  Lord's  Supper  adminis- 
tered to  unv^orthy  subjects.  The  Book  of  Discipline 
requires  no  previous  examination.  Example  of  the 
gross  practice  of  Pvlcthodism.  The  posture  of  kneel- 
ing, contradictory  to  Scripture,  and  Popish  in  its  ori- 
gin. Tends  to  foster  Superstition.  Superstitious  im- 
portance attached  to  the  "Prayer  of  Consecration." 
Postscript— pp.  202—228. 

LETTER   VII. 

Difficulties  on  the  subject  of  Church  government.  Scrip- 
tural argument  against  the  "  divers  orders"  of  the 
Methodist  ministry.  New^  Testament  deacons,  not 
Preachers  of  the  Gospel,  but  appointed  to  "serve 
tables."  "Methodist  Episcopacy"  not  taught  in  the 
Bible.  Admitted  by  Dr.  Bangs  to  be  a  mere  human 
invention.  Origin  of  the  system.  Excludes  the  people 
from  any  participation  in  the  government  of  the 
Church.  The  Preachers  are  the  legislative,  execu- 
tive, and  judicial  power.  Examples  of  the  clerical 
aristocracy  of  the  system,  extracted  from  Dr. 
Schmueker's    Letters.     All    the    Church    Fropertir 


XVI  CONTENTS. 

belongs  to  the  Conferences,  not  to  tlie  Congregations. 
Ultimate  tendencies  of  this  Popisli  system.  Wesley's 
opinions  respecting  Republics,  and  particularly  of 
American  Independence,  as  the  work  of  the  devil! 
New  Testament  Episcopacy.  Republicanism  of  the 
Bible  contrasted  with  Methodism — pp.  2:29 — 263. 

LETTER  VIII. 

Review  of  the  Articles  and  Discipline.  Origin  of  the 
Work.  Formed  from  Popish  prayer-books.  Calvin^ 
istic  Articles,  and  an  Arminian  Clergy.  Origin  of 
the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church.  Practice  against 
Theory.  Methodist  Liberality.  "Elect  Infants." 
Reverently  obey  the  Bishop.  Auricular  Confession. 
Compensation  of  the  Preachers*  Calculations  founded 
on  the  Discipline.  Preachers  pay  themselves  libe» 
rally.  Testimony  of  Facts.  Evidence  of  one  who 
had  been  formerly  a  Methodist  Preacher.  Steward's 
Notes  given  for  the  unpaid  balance  of  the  Preacher'* 
salary.  Reply  to  the  objections  made  to  these  state- 
t.nents.     Conclusion — pp  .264-=-^308. 

APPENDIX. 

JSxamination  of  the  "Dialogue  between  a  Predestinariart 
and  his  Friend."  Misrepresentations  of  the  Presby- 
terian Confession,  of  Calvin,  of  Twisse,  of  Piscator,  of 
Zanchius,  and  of  Peter  Martyr.  Singular  illustration 
of  the  prosperity  of  Methodism,  extracted  from  their 
Christian  Advocate — pp.  309. 


LETTER  I. 

INTRODUCTORY. 

Spirit  of  Methodism.    Unrighteous  Mcciisations, 

To  the  Rev. . 

Rev.  Sir: 

It  is  now  a  number  of  months  since  I  had  the 
pleasure  of  passing  an  evening  of  friendly  and 
Christian  intercourse  at  your  dwelling  near  B. 
Amid  the  varied  conversation  which  occurred  at 
that  time,  some  remarks  were  made  upon  the  hos- 
tile character  and  improper  spirit  exhibited  in  the 
assaults  of  the  advocates  of  Methodism,  upon 
the  denomination  of  Christians  to  which  we  have 
the  honor  and  privilege  to  belong.  In  speaking 
of  the  manner  in  which  these  assailants  of  our 
beloved  church  should  be  met,  you  said,  if  my 
memory  serves  me,  that  you  would  prefer,  ( in 
imitation  of  Faber's  celebrated  M^orks  on  Roman- 
ism and  Infidelity,)  a  clear  and  distinct  exposure 
of  the  numberless  difficulties  and  defenceless 
points  of  the  very  system  which  is  so  confidently 
announced  as  superior  to  all  others;  as  possessing 
all  their  excellencies  and  none  of  their  peculiar 
defects.  You  seemed  to  admit  that  in  every 
scheme  of  religious  belief,  there  woidd  necessari- 
ly be  found  some  points,  like  "  some  things"  in 


18  THK    DIFncULTITES    OF 

the  Epistles  of  "our  beloved  brother  Paul," 
'•'hard  to  be  understood^  but  in  the  system  of 
(loctrhie  and  discipline,  adopted  by  the  Presby- 
terian Church,  there  were,  in  your  view,  fewer 
of  these  difhculties  than  pertain  to  any  other  main- 
tained among  men ;  and  therefore  there  could  be 
no  hazard  that  in  directing  public  attention  to  the 
weak  points  in  other  systems,  we  should  leave 
unguarded  our  own. 

Although  the  idea,  thus  incidentally  suggested, 
impressed  my  mind  as  one  of  much  importance, 
it  certainly  did  not  occur,  that  in  tlie  arrangements 
of  Divine  Providence,  it  would  ever  fall  to  the  lot 
of  him  who  now  addresses  you,  to  extend  and  ap- 
ply the  principle.  But  occurrences  of  a  recent 
date,  have  called  up  the  remarks  of  that  evening 
vividly  to  my  recollection,  and  seem  to  compel 
the  attempt  at  least,  to  give  form  and  substance 
to  the  tliought  which  you  then  threw  out.  And 
though  I  sensibly  feel  the  importance  and  diffi- 
culty of  the  task,  and  the  demand  which  it  makes 
for  talents  of  a  high  order ;  yet  as  I  have  search- 
ed in  vain  for  some  convenient  mamial  to  place 
in  the  hands  of  tho  people  of  my  charge,  far  tlio 
purpose  of  guarding  them  agamst  the  peculiar 
form  of  delusion  designed  to  be  exposed  in  these 
letters,  my  apology  must  be,  the  necessity  of  tlie 
tase,  toj^ether  with  the  hope,  that  notwithstand- 


ARJMINIAN    METHODISM.  13 

ing  the  acknowledged  imperfections  of  this  per- 
formance, it  may  be  of  sotne  use,  until  a  more 
able  pen  shall  do  full  justice  to  the  subject. 

I  am  not  ignorant  that  the  office  of  publishing 
the  errors  and  weaknesses  of  others  is  altogether 
a  thankless  one.  But  I  also  know,  that  it  is  a 
christian  duty  to  "  contend  earnestly  for  the 
faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints,"  and  to  obviate, 
repel,  and  expose,  statements  and  representa- 
tions erroneously  and  unrighteously  made.  Let 
it  be  remembered  that  we  are  not  commencing 
this  controversy.  It  has  been  forced  upon  us, 
from  another  quarter  ;  and  the  only  alternative 
left  us,  is,  either  quietly  to  submit  to  the  wrongs 
which  are  heaped  upon  us,  to  witness  the  pre- 
cious truth  betrayed  and  insulted,  and  her  advo- 
cates placed  before  the  world  in  the  most  unjust 
and  injurious  light ;  or  to  endeavor,  after  the  ex- 
ample of  prophets,  apostles,  wise  men,  and  the 
Redeemer  himself,  to  fight  her  battles,  and  uplift 
her  standard  in  the  presence  of  her  foes.  This 
controversy,  we  repeat,  has  not  been  sought  by 
us  ;  it  has  been  violently  driven  upon  us,  contra- 
ry to  our  wishes  and  expectations.  Not  to  dwell 
upon  the  oft-repeated  efforts,  in  the  public  minis- 
trations of  Methodist  preachers,  to  disparage  and 
destroy  the  character  and  influence  of  Presbyte- 
rians— not  to  speak  of  their  attempts  to  impress 


20  TUB    DIFFICULTIES    Oy 

the  public  mind  with  the  idea,  that  our  ministers 
are  heartless  formalists,  who  preach  for  the  sake 
of  filthy  lucre,  "  without  converthif^  a  single 
soul  for  many  years,  nor  perhaps  through  their 
whole  ministry,''^ — not  to  urge  the  fact  of  their 
publicly  naming-  ou,:  ministers  in  connection  with 
the  amount  of  salary  received  by  them,  thus  de- 
signing to  make  the  impression,  that  while  we 
abound  in  wealth,  they  are  doomed  to  perpetual 
poverty : — not  to  dwell  upon  these  and  many 
other  16'orse  features  of  practical  Methodism,  we 
adduce  a  single  example,  which  is  on  record,  as 
fairly  representing  the  whole.  A  lady,  says  one 
of  our  most  respectable  ministers,  was  about  uni- 
ting with  the  Presbyterian  church.  "  On  open- 
ing the  door  one  morning,  the  letter  from  which 
the  following  extract  is  made,  was  found,  directed 
to  herself.  The  circuit  rider  was  charged  to  his 
face  with  being  the  author  of  it,  and  never  denied 
it." 

'*  My  Sister — As  you  are  about  to  take  a  step 
which  will  be  of  great  importance  to  your  future 
welfare,  permit  me  to  ask  a  few  questions — What 
benefit  do  you  expect  in  the  Presbyterian  church, 
you  cannot  find  in  ours  ?  Slc.  Brother  li." 
(meaning  himself)  "  has  never  got  but  twenty 
dollars,  whereas  the  Presbyterians  have  collect- 
ed near  $100  at  one  time.     Whose  labours  does 


ARMINIAN   METHODISM.  ?' 

God  bless  the  most,  that  of  the  Methouists  or 
Presbyterians  ?  Do  not  the  Presbyterians  admit 
of  card-playing,  going  to  theatres,  &c.,  &c.  ? 
how  then  can  they  be  the  people  of  God  ?  Take 
heed,  my  Sister,  how  you  join  that  church  ;  you 
may  repent  of  it,  when  it  is  eternally  too  late. 
Leaving  out  of  view  all  the  God-dishonoring  hor- 
rors of  election  and  reprobation,  I  cannot  see  how 
you  can  join  that  people.  Beware,  my  sister, 
what  you  do;  farewell  till  we  meet  at  the  judg- 
ment, where  you  will  know  that  he  who  writes 
this  is  Your  Friend,"  * 

But  to  prove  beyond  the  shadow  of  a  doubt, 
that  we  are  acting  on  the  principle  of  self-defence, 
the  following  facts  may  suffice.  Into  the  district 
where  Providence  has  cast  my  lot,  t  there  was 
introduced,  some  months  since,  a  parcel  of  Me- 
thodist tracts,  which  were  circulated  among  the 
famiUes  of  my  charge ;  and,  in  particular,  were 
carefully  conveyed  into  a  part  of  the  congrega- 
tion (a  small  villagej  where  not  a  Methodist  re- 
sided, but  where  it  was  generally  known  there 
was  some  unusual  attention  to  religious  things. 
The  same  publications,  I  am  informed  by  a  Me- 
thodist preacher,  are  scattered  in  great  numbers 
through  our  cities,  and  over  the  wide  extent  of 

«  See  Dr.  Green's  "  Christian  Advocate,"  Vol.  9,  p.  23. 
t  The  writer  then  resided  in  MifHin  county,  Pa. 

2* 


22  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

our  country.  But  before  proceeding  to  quote 
from  tliese  tracts,  I  wish  to  remind  you  that  the 
statements  about  to  be  given,  are  published,  not 
by  an  individual,  but  by  the  General  Tract  Soci- 
ety of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  church,  under  the 
care  and  control  of  the  General  Conference.  'JMiey 
may  therefore  be  regarded  as  the  unanimous  ver- 
dict of  that  church  in  reference  to  Prcybyterian- 
ism. 

We  are  accused  of  believing,  (I  give  tlieir  ex- 
press language,)  "  that  God  by  an  eternal  and  un- 
changeable decree,  hath  predestinated  to  eternal 
damnation  far  the  greater  part  of  mankind,  icith' 
out  any  respect  to  their  works  ;  that  God  is  the 
author  of  all  sin,  ivorkbig  ivlckedness  in  the 
tvicked ;  that  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  is  a 
mere  mock  and  illusion ;  that  men  are  in  a  far 
worse  condition  than  the  devils  in  hell,  and  that 
God  sends  forth  his  servants  with  a  lie  in  their 
mouths  ;"  that  God  has  taken  the  work  of  the  de- 
vil out  of  his  hands  and  does  it  more  elfectually  : 
the  devil  tempts,  God  forces  men  to  sin  and  to 
perish."  We  are  cliarged  with  representing  our 
blessed  Lord  "  as  a  hypocrite,  a  deceiver  of  tlie 
people,  a  man  void  of  common  sincerity ;  as 
mocking  his  helpless  creatures  ;  as  pretending 
tlic  love  Avhicli  lie  had  not ;  as  weeping  croco- 
dile's  tear?,   weeping   over  tlie  prey    which  lie 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  23 

himself  had  compelled  to  sin,  and  then  doomed 
to  destruction  ;  as  thus  representing  the  most  ho- 
ly God  as  worse  than  the  devil,  more  false,  more 
cruel,  and  more  unjust." 

It  is  true  that  these  impious  statements  are  not 
all  charged  upon  Presbyterians  by  name;  yet 
our  doctrines  are  repeatedly  named,  and  our 
Confession  of  Faith  is  very  often  quoted  in  proof, 
and  in  some  instances,  as  we  will  presently  show, 
our  very  ministers,  as  a  body,  are  introduced,  in 
infamous  connexion  with  these  shocking  blasphe- 
mies. It  has  indeed  been  said  that  Methodists 
urge  these  things  only  as  objections  to  the  Cal- 
\lmsiic  sysfein;  that  they  do  not  suppose  that 
Presbyterians  adopt  such  sentiments ;  but  only, 
if  they  were  consistent  in  following  out  their  the- 
ological views  to  their  consequences,  they  must 
receive  them  as  the  inevitable  inferences.  If 
this  were  the  light  in  which  these  charges  are  to 
be  viewed,  it  would,  I  acknowledge,  relieve  their 
authors  of  much  of  the  guilt  of  iiaving  made  them. 
We  will  see, 

I  confess  I  once  thought  so.  I  thought  these 
sentiments  were  imputed  to  us  rather  as  mistakes 
of  judgment,  than  the  errors  of  a  corrupt  and  dis- 
honest heart.  But  those  were  the  days  of  my  ig- 
norance. Since  that  period,  a  ray  from  tiie  bril- 
liant constellation  of  Methodism   at  New  York 


2  4  Tin:  Diri-'cn/riEs  ov 

has  flashed  across  my  path,  and  shed  ligl>t  into 
the  darkest  cliambers  of  my  soul.  Methodism 
has  gone  much  further.  She  insists  that  we 
must  and  do  maintain  precisely  what  is  given 
above  as  a  fair  exhibition  of  our  views.  And 
when  Presbyterians  have  demurred  and  hesitated, 
she  has  fallen  quite  into  a  passion,  because  we 
will  not  take  her  word  for  it ;  and  uses  hard  epi- 
thets, and  throws  out  dark  insinuations,  and  mut- 
ters something  about  "  duplicity  and  artifice." 
And  unless  we  openly  profess  and  teach  the  sen- 
timents, which  she  says  we  hold,  she  will  feel 
herself  in  duty  bound  to  expose  our  dishonesty. 

This  is  by  no  means  a  picture  of  the  fancy. 
I  have  now  lying  before  me,  a  tract,  published 
under  the  direction  of  the  General  Canference  of 
the  Methodist  church,  and  entitled  "  Duplicity 
Exposed,"  in  which  an  attempt  is  made  to  hold 
up  Presbyterians  and  Congregationalists  to  the 
deep  detestation  of  every  honest  man.  Its  very 
title  is  a  sufiiciont  index  to  its  character.  John- 
son defines  duplicity,  "  deceit,  doublencss  of 
heart  and  tonorae."  Of  course,  the  design  of 
this  tract  is  to  expose  the  '^fi  aud  and  deceitful  prac- 
tices of  Presbyterians  and  others,  by  which 
falsehood  is  made  to  pass  for  truth."  But  we 
will  let  the  tract  speak  for  itself.  After  some  in- 
troductory remarks  upon  the  imporlance  of  since- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  25 

rity  ill  religious  professions,   "  Duplicity  Expo- 
sed "  proceeds  as  follows: 

"  It  never  comports  with  honesty,  much  less 
with  religious  integrity,  to  dissemble  with  the 
public,  professing  one  thing  whilst  we  industri- 
ously circulate  another;  However  unwilling  we 
are  to  charge  such  duplicity  on  A?n  Y  BODY  of 
people,  yet  we  are  constrained  to  say  the  preten- 
sions and  practices  of  some  men  are  to  us  unac- 
countable. We  have  always  understood  that  the 
Congregational  churches  in  this  country,  and  all 
who  are  associated  with  them,  were  in  doctrine 
founded  on  the  Assembly's  Catechism,  and  Say- 
brook  Platform."  "  Agi'eeably  to  the  peculiar 
sentiments  contained  in  these  confessions,  we 
have  thought  ourselves  autliorized  to  say  the  Asso- 
ciated Congregational  and  Presbyterian  churches 
believe  and  teach,  that  God  for  his  own  glory 
hath  foreordained  whatsoever  comes  to  pass ; 
that  by  the  decree  of  God  some  men  cmd  angels 
were  predestinated  to  eterncd  life  and  seme  to 
death,  and  that  the  number  of  the  predestinated 
is  so  definite  that  it  cannot  be  either  increased 
or  diminished. ^^  "But  for  several  years  the  pub- 
lic have  been  entertained  with  pitiful  complaints 
against  the  Arminians  and  Methodists,  for  mis- 
representing their  doctrine,  and  charging  them' 
with  principles  of  fatality,  reproliation,    &c.,  all 


26  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

which  they  have  gravely  affected  to  deny.  And 
that  they  may  lull  the  people  into  favoi\  they 
have  dicelt  with  seeming  earnestness  on  the  ge- 
neral invitations  of  the  Gospel,  free  agency  in 
man,  and  universal  atonement  of  Christ ;  but 
with  all  their  ingenuity  they  have  not  been  able 
to  conceal  from  the  well-informed,  the  cloven 
foot  of  their  peculiar  tenets,  unconditional  elec- 
tion and  reprobation." — pp.  1,2. 

In  connection  with  the  foregoing,  tlie  tract  con- 
tains an  abusive  attack  upon  a  certain  Mr.  Weeks, 
author  of -a  Scripture  Catechism,  who  is  charged 
in  three  instances  with  duplicity.  In  another 
place  they  assert,  "  it  ivas  not  ignorance  in  Mr. 
Weeks.  It  was  an  intention  to  blind  the  eyes  of 
the  people  concerning  his  oivn  doctrine,''^  ^-c. — 
p.  6. 

Again  :  the  author  and  publishers  of  this  reli- 
gioui  trad  state  their  object  to  be,  "simply  to 
show  that  the  Associated  Congregational  and 
Presbyterian  churches  do  lelieve  and  teach  tiie 
S.ime  doctrines  as  ag  eed  on  at  Saybrook,  and  es- 
tablished by  law  in  this  state  more  than  a  hundred 
years  ago.  And  notwithstanding  the  pitiful  whi- 
ning about  their  being  misrepresented,  they  are 
as  high-toned  Predestinarians  at  tliis  day  as  ever 
they  were."  '•  We  say,"  continues  the  tract, 
*'  they   believe  the   doctrine    of  eternal   and  un- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  27 

changeable  decrees,  of  unconditional  election  and 
reprobation,  of  the  uniuersal  agency  of  God,  by 
which  he  workeih  all  things  in  all  7nen,  even 
tvickedness  in  the  wickecV^-^^''  because  he  choo- 
ses on  the  whole  that  they  should  go  on  in  sin, 
and  thereby  give  him  a  plausible  pretext  for 
damning  them  in  the  flames  of  hell  forever,''^ 
"We  do  not  mean  to  blame  any  person  for  be- 
lieving the  above  stated  doctrine,  if  they  cannot 
conscientiously  disbelieve  it;  but  we  do  and  must 
blame  them,  when  they  dissemble  their  belief  by 
som,etimes  saying  they  do  not  believe  u^hat  we 
know  they  industriously  teach.''^ — pp.  8,  9. 

"If  the  associated  Congregational  and  Presby- 
terian churches  have  made  any  material  alteration 
in  their  doctrine  and  discipline,  we  think  they 
owe  it  to  the  public  to  show  what  articles  they 
have  rejected,"  &;c.  "In  short,  they  ought  to 
publish  a  revised  and  improved  edition  of  their 
Confession  of  Faith" — p.  9.  Again  they  say— 
"The  object  of  this  tract  is  not  to  controvert  or 
disprove  the  horrid  sentiments  it  discloses,  but 
simply  to  demonstrate  that  such  sentiments  are 
held  and  propagated,  while  many  who  affect  to 
disavow  them,  are  endeavoring  to  suit  them  to 
the  popular  taste  by  exhibiting  them  in  a  disguis- 
ing dress.     TFe  blame  7iot  people  ivho  honestly 


28  THE    DIFFICl'LTIES    OF 

believe,  but  we  blame  tliose  icho  di^bditve  what 
they  openli/  profess  and  teach.'" — pp.  9,  10. 

The  substance  of  these  qiiotalions  may  be  col- 
lected at  one  view  from  such  passages  as  the  fol- 
lowing: "Zb  dissemble  tvith  the  public,  by  arti- 
Jice  conceal  our  real  sentiments,  professing  one 
thing  ivhilc  ive  industriously  circulate  another;'^ 
*Hhat  they  may  lull  the  people  into  favor,  they 
have  dwelt  with  seeming  earnestness" — ^'•dis- 
semble their  belief" — ^'disbelieve  ivhat  they  pro- 
fess and  teach,"  Slc,  &c. 

Now,  at  this  stage  of  the  evidence,  that  we  arc 
writing  in  self-defence,  we  cannot  but  pause  and 
inquire — By  ^vhat  authority  has  Methodism 
placed  herself  upon  the  judgment-seat,  and  as- 
suming the  prerogative  of  Ilim  who  tries  the 
heart,  dared  to  pass  upon  others  a  sentence  of 
this  dark  character?  She  has  attempted  to  enter 
the  secret  recesses  of  the  soul,  to  examine  the 
unseen  motive,  and  arraign  conscience  before  her 
bar.  She  has  thus  branded  this  whole  scheme  of 
proselytism  with  the  name  of  blasphemy.  "Who 
opposeth  and  cxaltcth  herself  above  all  that  is 
called  God,  so  that  she,  as  God,  sittelh  in  the 
temple  of  God,  showing  herself  that  she  is  God." 
What  could  Popery  do  more? 

The  allegations  of  deception  and  fraud  con- 
tained in  the  foremeniioned  trad.,  ou-jlit  not  to  be 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  29 

rashly  or  lightly  made  against  any  individual, 
much  less  against  several  thousand  acknowledged 
ministers  of  the  Gospel,  We  admit  indeed  that 
it  is  the  right,  and  even  the  duly,  of  those  who 
regard  us  as  maintaining  dangerous  error,  to  en- 
deavor to  guide  us  to  the  knowledge  of  what  they 
think  to  be  the  truth.  But  no  principle  of  reli- 
gion, nor  of  common  justice,  will  sanction  their 
publishing  us  as  a  set  of  deep  and  artful  deceiv- 
ers, or  their  ascribing  to  us  a  character  and  course 
of  conduct,  which,  if  generally  regarded  as  cor- 
rect, must  degrade  us  from  our  mmisterial  stand- 
ing, as  unworthy  of  countenance  among  all  hon- 
orable and  righteous  men.  Not  content  with  en- 
deavoring to  show  that  our  system  of  doctrine 
legitimately  leads  to  certain  impious  consequen- 
ces, they  publish  us  from  Dan  to  Beersheba,  as 
guilty  of  deliberate  and  designed  dishonesty,  be- 
cause we  are  not  willing  to  think  with  them  in 
this  matter,  but  refuse  to  adopt  a  thousand  impie- 
ties of  the  Arminian  brain.  Again  we  inquire — 
From  what  revelation  of  the  divine  will  have 
Methodists  learned  that  these  are  the  measures 
approved  by  Heaven  for  promoting  the  cause  of 
religion,  and  advancing  the  glory  of  God? 

We  have  said  that  charges  of  this  serious  na- 
ture ought  not  to  be  made  against  large  bodies  of 
the  ministers  of  Christ,  without  some  verv  clear 
3 


30  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

and  substantial  evidence  in  proof.     What  is  the 
evidence  in  the  case  under  review?     By  examin- 
ing the  foregoing  extracts   from  the  tract  called 
♦♦Duplicity  Exposed,"  it  will  be  seen  to  consist 
of  two  parts.     1st.  We  ♦♦believe  and  teach"  the 
doctrine  of  divine  decrees,  election,  and  reproba- 
tion.    2d.  We  nevertheless  have  the  hardihood 
to  teach  ♦♦  the  general  invitations  of  the  Gospel," 
♦♦man's  free  agency,"  and  the  "  universal  suffi- 
ciency of  the  atonement."     These  are  ♦'the  head 
and  front  of  our  offending,"  by  the  showing  of 
the  tract  itself;  and  from  these  premises  the  con- 
clusion is  drawn,  that  we  are  guilty  of  ♦♦dissem- 
bling," ♦♦artifice,"  and  ♦♦duplicity,"  even  whilst 
ministering  at  the  altar,  and  under  the  immediate 
eye  of  the  Searcher  of  all  hearts.     And  for  what 
object  are  we  supposed  to  be  willing  to  act  this 
impious  part — for  what  invaluable  benefit  are  we 
paying  this  extravagant  price?     Why,  forsooth, 
♦♦to  lull  the  people  into  favor,"  and  prevent  their 
deserting   our  congregations,    and  uniting  with 
Methodists.      But   it    may    perhaps    contribute 
somewhat  to  enable  us  to  survive  our  calamities, 
that  the  other  Calvhiistic  denominations  in  the 
country  share  equally  with  the  Presbyterian  and 
Congregational  in  the  ♦♦tender  mercies"  of  the 
preachers.     'I'hc  Associate  Reformed,  the  Anti- 
burgher,   the   Covenanting,    and  many   of    the 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  31 

Baptist  churches,  "believe  and  teach"  uncondi- 
tional election,  and  also  reprobation  on  account 
of  sin.  These  churches  do  also  teach  the 
"general  invitations,"  "  free  agency,"  &c.  It 
follows,  therefore,  that  as  they  are  equally  guilty 
in  the  premises,  they  are  also  equally  guilty  in 
the  conclusion.  We  shall  be  ablt;  to  sympathise 
with  each  other. 

Such  is  a  specimen  of  the  means  of  gi'ctce,  pre- 
pared by  the  preachers  for  the  use  and  edification 
of  their  flocks.  In  the  ardor  of  controversy,  we 
can  apologise  for  indiscretions.  We  consent  ta 
give  and  take  a  little.  But  the  cool  deliberate 
composition  and  publication  of  "Duplicity  Ex- 
posed," by  the  Conference,  and  the  managers  of 
their  Book  concern,  are  evident  fruits  of  the  spirit 
which  is  not  from  above.  If  indeed  we  were  to 
consent,  (to  use  their  own  language,)  "/o  swallow 
all  their  assertions  together^  and  honestly  avow 
theni,''^  they  would  then  cease  to  charge  us  with 
fraud  and  falsehood.  But  on  this  condition  alone^ 
it  seems,  can  we  expect  to  enjoy  their  favorable 
opinion. 

If,  however,  the  preachers  can^^^'O^^e  the  truth 
of  these  bold  accusations,  they  will  stand  justified 
before  the  church  and  the  world  in  this  matter. 
If  they  cannot  prove  their  truth,  we  would  re- 
commend   them   to    commit   to    memory,    Dr. 


32  THB    DirncMLTlES    OF 

Barrow's  definition  of  SLANDER,  viz:  ''Utter- 
ing false  speeches  against  our  neighbor,  to  the 
prejudice  of  his  fame,  safety,  welfare,  and  that  o'.it 
of  malignity,  vanity,  ill-nature,  rashness,  or  bad 
design."  The  preachers  will  have  many  friends 
in  this  righteous  cause.  That  the  trutlis  of  the 
Scriptures  should  incur  the  "wrath"  of  such  per- 
sons, and  that  their  advocates  should  be,  as  in 
the  days  of  the  apostles,  '*  every  where  spoken 
against,^^  is  inspired  evidence  that  Calvinists 
agree  with  Him  who  hath  pronounced  his  bless- 
ing upon  his  people,  ^'■wlien  men  say  all  manner 
of  evil  of  ihem  FALSELY  for  his  sake.^^  And 
if  called  in  his  holy  Providence  to  speak  or  write 
in  defence  of  his  church  or  his  truth,  they. may 
*'' rejoice  and  be  exceeding  ghul.''^ 

If  further  proof  that  we  have  been  driven  to  the 
necessity  of  defending  ourselves,  our  doctrines, 
and  our  good  name,  be  required,  it  is  at  hand. 
Li  another  of  the  publications  of  the  General 
Conference,  through  their  Tract  Society,  they 
give  numerous  references  to  our  standard  authors, 
with  the  design  of  fastening  the  foregoing  blas- 
phemous sentiments  upon  our  church.  This 
tract  is  entitled,  *'A  Dialogue  between  a  Predes- 
tinarian  and  his  Friend,"  and  refers  in  two  in- 
stances to  the  Presbyterian  Confession  of  Faith 
to  support  the  charge  of  maintaining  the  grossest 


ARMINIAN   MSTHODISir.  3S 

impieties.  A  few  specimens  of  the  candor,  fair- 
ness, and  accuracy  of  these  references,  must  suf- 
fice for  the  present.*  In  attempting  to  quote  the 
standards  of  Presbyterianism,  they  cite  "chap- 
ters 3d  and  5th  of  the  Assembly's  Catechism." 
But  if  these  learned  gentlemen  had  inquired  of  a 
Sabbath  school  child,  they  might  have  received 
the  important  information,  that  the  Assembly's 
Catechism  is  not  divided  into  chapters;  and  been 
also  instructed,  that  before  attempting  to  quote  a 
book,  it  is  generally  prudent^  to  say  the  least,  to 
see  and  read  it.  Ttiis  blunder  might  be  regarded 
as  a  mere  mistake  of  the  press,  were  it  not  that 
this  unfortunate  "mistake"  is  found  in  the  "works 
of  Wesley,"  the  author  of  the  tract ;  and  also  in 
the  stereotyped  volume  of  Methodist  doctrinal 
tracts ;  and  also  in  Dr.  Bangs'  reply  to  Ilaskel. 
They  all  talk  of  chapters  3d  and  5th  of  the  As- 
sembly's Catechism;  and  even  Dr.  W.  Fisk,t 
the  great  champion  of  Arminian  Methodism, 
commits  the  same  blunder. 

Again:  The  following  sentiment  is  ascribed  to 
Dr.  Twisse,  who  was  the  presiding  officer  of  the 
Westminster  Assembly.  "All  things  come  to 
pass  by  the  efficacious   and  irresistible  will  of 

*  See  Appendix  to  this  volume. 

t  President  of  the  Wesleyan  UniverBitj,  Conn. 
3* 


34  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

God."  Now  this  was  originally  the  charge  of 
Arminius  against  Calvinism,  "cfficaci  Dei  volun- 
tate,  et  cui  resisti  nequeat  omnia  evenire,"  not 
the  language  of  Twisse.  It  is  true,  Dr.  Twisse 
professes  his  willingness  to  adopt  this  language 
with  certain  explanations,  the  design  and  purport 
of  which  may  be  learned  from  his  definition  of 
the  divine  will  or  decree — "Propositum  Dei,  ut 
facial  vel  pcrmittal  aliqiiid;"  that  is,  "//le  pur- 
pose of  God  to  do  or  permit  any  things  AVould 
not  Christian  men  be  ashamed  of  such  perversion 
of  the  sentiments  of  any  author? 

Finally:  Zanchius  is  represented  as  teaching 
that  "  God's  first  constitution  was  that  some 
should  be  destined  to  eternal  ruin;  and  to  this  end 
their  sins  were  ordained,  and  denial  of  grace  in 
order  to  their  sins."  But  there  is  no  such  pas- 
sage in  the  section  of  the  works  of  Zanchius  re- 
ferred to  in  the  tract;  and  the  accuracy  and  fair- 
ness of  the  extract  may  be  learned  from  the  fol- 
lowing, Nvhich  are  the  express  words  of  that 
author:  "Deus,  ut  quotidie  permiltit  tarn  pios 
quam  impios  labi  in  peccatta;  sicquoque  ab  eterno 
decrevit  ut  omnes  peccare  permitteret,  Quare 
non  falso  dictum  universes  homines  eo  fuisse 
ordinatos,  ut  permitterentur  peccare;"  that  is, 
"God,  as  he  daily  permits  the  good  as  well  as 
the  wicked  to  fall  into  sin,  so  also  from  eternity 


ARMINIAN   METHODISM.  35 

decreed  to  permit  all  men  to  sin.  Wherefore  it 
is  correctly  said  that  all  men  were  so  far  the  ob- 
jects of  ordination,  that  they  might  be  permitted 
to  sin."  Thus  much  for  the  learning  and  can- 
dor of  the  advocates  of  Methodism!  The  cause 
which  demands  such  methods  of  support,  must 
be  incapable  of  legitimate  defence. 

On  a  review  of  these  evidences  of  the  hostile 
spirit  of  Methodism,  I  believe.  Rev.  Sir,  you  will 
agree  with  me  that  the  Presbyterian  ministry 
must  sink  very  far  below  its  proper  level,  before 
it  will  become  necessary  to  refute  or  even  for- 
mally deny  such  calumny,  as  is  contained  in 
"Duplicity  Exposed."  And  as  to  those  who  are 
capable  of  writing  and  publishing  such  tracts, /or 
the  glory  of  God  and  the  spread  of  religion^  it 
is  not  probable  they  would  be  made  either  wiser 
or  better  men  by  any  such  denial  or  refutation. 
Permit  me,  therefore,  in  drawing  this  letter  to  a 
close,  to  suggest  a  few  very  obvious  reflections. 

1.  Suppose  Methodism  should  succeed  in  her 
attempt  to  fix  this  stain  upon  the  reputation  and 
character  of  three  or  four  thousand  acknowledged 
ministers  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ — who  would 
be  the  gainer?  Would  it  be  the  cause  of  true 
religion?  But  how  can  it  advantage  the  cause  of 
religion,  to  expose  four  thousand  of  her  ministers 
to  contempt  and  shame?    No!    It  is  on  the  altar 


36  THB    DIFPICULTIB8   OF 

of  exclusive  Methodism  that  this  costly  sacrifice 
must  be  offered;  it  is  at  her  footstool,  and  to  ap- 
pease her  unholy  jealousies,  that  religion  herself 
must  be  cast  down  wounded,  bleeding,  disho- 
nored. 

But  what  had  the  ministers  of  the  Presbyterian 
church    done,   to   call   down  the   vengeance   of 
Methodism?     Had  they  commenced  a  system  of 
fierce    and    unrighteous    hostility    against    that 
church?     Had  they  roused  the  blood  of  passion, 
by  nncandid  and  unchristian  misrepresentations? 
No  such  thing.     The  whole  of  their  aggravated 
crime,  according  to  the  showing  of  the  tract  itself, 
was,  that  they  had  taken  the  liberty  of  laying  be- 
fore the  public,  their  oivn  views  of  their  oivn 
doctrines,  in  the  form   and  language  7vhich 
seemed  to  them  most  agreeable  to  Scripture  and 
reason.     But  for  this  unpardonable  offence  forth 
step  the  Doctors  of  Methodism,  at  the  head  of  the 
General  Conference,  and  attempt  to  hold  them  up 
to  public  reprobation,  as  guilty  of  a  departure 
from  the   simplest  laws  of  truth    and  honesty. 
And  this,  too,  as  part  and  parcel  of  those  efforts 
by  which  religion  is  to  be  promoted;  and  worst 
of  all  and  most  to  be  lamented,  by  the  best  and 
brightest  of  the  very  sect  which  zealously  pro- 
fesses and  advocates  the  doctrine  of  "sinless  per- 
fection!"    From    all    such    **  perfection"   may 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  37 

Heaven  preserve  us  !  Indeed,  if  v/e  were  Ar- 
minians,  we  should  be  tempted  to  think  that 
whenever  our  Methodist  friends  lift  the  pen 
against  Calvinism,  they  "fyll  from  grace."  But 
to  their  own  master  they  stand  or  fall;  nor  would 
we  v/ish  to  be  exposed  Vv'iih  them  to  the  searching 
interrogatory— "Who  art  tho^.  that  jiulgest  an- 
other man's  servant?"  And  as  if  to  render  the 
charge  against  us  of  secret  plans,  motives,  and 
intentions,  supremely  ridiculous,  the  men  who 
urge  these  things  are  those  preachers,  who  have 
legislated  the  entire  ecclesiastical  power  of  their 
church  into  their  own  hands — wlio  have  excluded 
the  people,  not  only  from  a  seat  and  a  vote  in 
their  Conferences,  but  even  from  the  privilege  of 
spectators — and  who  meet  in  secret  conclave  to 
transact  business,  to  deliberate  and  to  decide  on 
subjects  which  fear  or  shame  forbids  to  meet  the 
eyt^  in  public,  either  of  friend  or  foe!  Whatever 
may  be  the  uiiimate  designs  of  Providence  with 
regard  to  the  agents  of  this  system,  the  '-prius 
dementat"  stands  forth  in  coloring  too  glaring  to 
be  misunderstood. 

2.  An  inquiry  will  naturally  arise  in  every  re- 
flecting mind — "  Do  Methodists  really  believe 
what  they  have  published  to  our  prejudice?  Do 
they  believe  their  own  assertions?  If  they  have 
said  and  done  these  things,  knowingly  to  slander 


38  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

Prosbytoiirins,  wc  can  only  say,  'Father,  forgive 
thcin.'  But  if,  on  tlic  other  hand,  they  are  per- 
suaded of  the  truth  of  their  assertions,  then  do 
they  believe  that  we  profess  a  religion  essentially 
diiTerent  from  theirs;  that  we  worship  anotlicr 
God;"  and  that  the  Gospel  we  preach  is  as  radi- 
cally opposed  to  theirs,  as  the  father  of  evil  to  the 
Father  of  lights — the  god  of  this  world,  to  the 
God  of  infinite  mercy.  How  then  can  they  con- 
sent to  hear  tlie  preaching  of  men  who  entertain 
such  blasphemous  views?  Why  do  they  charge 
with  bigotry  those  Presbyterians  who  refuse  to 
commune  with  them  at  the  table  of  the  Lord? 
How  is  it  possible  they  can  desire  it? — or  to  in- 
vite Methodists  to  commune  with  them?  How 
can  they  venture  to  drink  "  the  cup  of  devils,'* 
with  us,  if  we  maintain  these  profane  and  im- 
pious sentiments?  Indeed,  if  they  speak  the 
truth  of  us,  we  are  worshippers  of  Satan,  since 
we  worship  a  god  "more  false,  more  cruel,  and 
more  unjust."  We  have  only  to  add,  that  the 
foregoing  are  difficulties,  which  we  are  sincerely 
thankful  we  are  not  required  to  solve. 

Besides,  how  altered  is  their  tone  and  lan- 
guage, when  soliciting  the  pecuniary  aid  of  Pres- 
byterians in  the  erection  of  their  houses  of  wor- 
ship, or  for  the  support  of  their  preachers!  All 
is    then    smooth    complaisance,    and   Christian 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  30 

charity,  and  special  care  is  taken  not  to  offend 
our  ears  with  such  phrases  as  "duplicity,"  "dis- 
sembling," &LC.  &c.  After  they  have  secured 
our  contributions,  however,  it  is  no  uncommon 
thing  for  Presbyterians  to  hear  from  the  very 
pulpits  which  they  have  assisted  to  build,  the 
sentiments  of  their  Confession  misrepresented,  as 
implying  "infant  damnation,"  "fatality,"  and 
such  like ;  and  their  spiritual  instructors  de- 
nounced in  no  measured  terms. 

3.  However  agreeable  to  the  character,  tem- 
per, and  spirit  of  ministers  of  the  Gospel,  the 
above-mentioned  tracts  are  supposed  to  be ;  and 
however  well  adapted  to  recommend  and  pro- 
mote that  religion  which  "  thinketh  no  eu^7," 
which  forbids  to  ^Hake  up  an  evil  report  against 
our  neighbor,^^  or  to  bear  false  witness  against 
him;  yet  it  cannot  be  denied,  that  among  those 
who  do  not  recognize  the  sanctions  of  religion, 
nor  walk  in  her  light,  a  transaction  of  the  above- 
mentioned  character  would  have  led  to  results 
widely  different  from  the  pains  and  penalties  of 
an  ecclesiastical  tribunal.  The  civil  court  would 
have  afforded  redress.  The  strong  arm  of  justice 
takes  effectual  cognizance  of  him  who  attempts 
to  deprive  his  neighbor  of  his  good  name.  There 
is  a  ivay,  however,  of  doing  such  things,  which 
is  at  least  more  safe;  though  I  greatly   doubt 


40  Tin:  DirriciLTiES  of 

whether  among  the  men  of  this  wicked  world,  it 
is  considered  mncli  more  honorable. 

4.  But  perhaps  the  most  curious  feature  of  iliis 
singular  affair  remains  to  be  adduced.  The 
preachers  themselves  have  given,  in  their  stand- 
ard publications,  a  description  of  practical  Me- 
thodism, which,  if  the  colors  are  correctly  ap- 
plied, will  transfer  the  charges  of  "  duplicity," 
&c.,  to  their  authors ;  and  could  this  description 
be  known  as  extensively  as  the  charges,  would 
completely  neutralize  their  poison.  On  pages 
52,  53,  of  the  Book  of  Discipline,  we  read  as 
follows:  "The  world  says,  ^The  Metkodisfs 
are  no  better  than  other  people.  This  is  NOT 
TRUE  in  the  general.'  "  (-God,  1  thank  thee," 
said  the  self-righteous  Pharisee,  "  that  I  am  not 
as  other  men."  After  thus  publishing  their  su- 
perior goodness,  we  are  naturally  led  to  expect 
from  the  same  source,  a  very  exalted  character  of 
that  piety,  which  is  so  much  belter  than  that  of 
all  the  world  beside.  A  few  lines  below,  on  the 
same  page,  we  read — "How  little  faith  is  there 
among  us!  How  much  love  of  the  world!  De- 
sire of  pleasure,  of  ease,  of  getting  tnoneyJ*^ 
"What  continual  judging  one  another!  What 
gossiping,  evil  speaking,  tale-bearing!  WHAT 
WANT   OF  MORAL   HONESTY!!!" 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  41 

But  lest  this  should  be  supposed  to  appertain 
only  to  the  weak  brethren,  we  next  cite  Wesley's 
account  of  "between  three  and  four  hundred  who 
professed  to  be  perfected  in  love.''^  It  is  extracted 
from  pages  34S,  '49,  of  their  stereotyped  voknuc 
of  "Doctrinal  Tracts."  "What  do  you  think  of 
those  in  London  who  seem  to  have  been  lately 
renewed  in  love?''^  After  replying  that  there 
was  ^^ something  very  peculiar"  in  the  experience 
of  the  greater  part  of  them,  (particularly  that  they 
were  "emptied  of  sin  first,  and  then  filled  with 
love,")  states  a  number  of  particulars,  such  as 
their  "resisting  evil,"  their  not  receiving  "reproof 
or  contradiction"  well,  their  "replying  in  a  loud 
voice,  with  an  angry  tone,  or  in  a  sharp  or  surly 
manner;  a  want  of  goodness,  kindness,  and  mil. - 
ness,  in  their  spirit  and  temper;  a  want  of  tempe- 
rance," &c.  Again  we  read — "Some  are  want- 
ing in/fZc/i/?/;  a  NICE  REGARD  to  TRUTH, 
simplicity,  and  godly  sincerity!  Their  love  is 
hardly  without  dissimidation.  Something  lik- 
GUILE  is  found  in  their  mouth.'^^  And  suc'r 
are  specimens  of  practical  Methodism!  It  is  nc' 
with  feelings  of  pleasure  that  we  make  these 
statements,  but  as  a  necessary  means  of  self 
vindication  from  unrighteous  assault. 

5.  Finally:    The  unchristian  measures  up    ?: 
which  we  have  commented,  have  been  for  msr  r 
4  " 


45  THE    DirnCVLTIES    OF 

years  in  active  operation,  directed  not  against  in- 
dividuals, but  against  the  interests  of  the  whole 
Presbyterian  Body,  without  meeting  with  the  re- 
buke and  exposure  they  so  richly  deserve.     But 
of  late  our  silence  has  been  urged  as  evidence  of 
a  consciousness  of  guilt.     "If  these  things  are 
not  true,"  said  a  Methodist  preacher  to  some  of 
the  people  of  my  charge,  "why  are  they  not  con- 
tradicted and  refuted?"     We  have  been  driven, 
therefore,  to  the  unpleasant  alternative,  either  of 
standing  before  tlie  public  as  confounded  by  a 
sense  of  guilt,  our  forbearance  construed  to  our 
disadvantage,  and  our  love  of  peace,  made  a  pre- 
text for  more  violent  assault;  or  of  taking  up  the 
pen  to  assert  and  prove  our  innocence,  and  to  di- 
rect the  course  of  public  justice,  so  as  to  strike 
those   who  ^re  really  guilty.     The  interests  of 
truth  will  permit  us  to  be  silent  no  longer.     To 
ourselves,  our  children,  and  the  church  of  God, 
we  owe  it,  to  let  the  truth  be  known.     And  if  in 
defending  the  precious  cause  of  onr  Master,  and 
vindicating  our  good  name,  we  are  compelled  to 
publish  some  things  which  seem  to  bear  heavily 
upon  those  whom  we  wish  to  call  Christians,  we 
appeal  to  the  candor  of  every  reader,  to  say,  who 
have  been  the  originators  and  instigators,  and  of 
consequence,  where  must  rest  the  responsibility, 
af  Ibis  mkappy  oentrovOTsy.     "If  it  be  p©gsilil«. 


ARMINIAN    METK0DISM.  48 

98  much  as  lieth  in  you,  live  peaceably  with  all 
men;"  but,  the  authority  which  enjoins  "peace," 
wherever  it  is  possible,  also  teaches  that  there  are 
limits  to  that  "possibility." 

Thus,  Rev.  Sir,  have  I  endeavored  to  glance  at 
some  of  the  measures  by  which  Methodism  is 
attempting  to  fix  her  foundations  amid  the  ruins 
of  other  denominations.  We  only  wish  these 
things  to  be  kept  in  mind,  as  determining  the  atti- 
tude of  attack  or  defence,  of  either  party,  while 
we  proceed  to  weigh  in  "the  balance  of  the  Sanc- 
tuary," the  value  of  the  system  of  which  these 
are  some  of  the  hopeful  fruits;  a  system,  be  it  re- 
membered, which  as  it  challenges  comparison 
with  others,  and  proclaims  with  great  vehemence 
their  supposed  defects,  ought  itself  to  be  pre- 
eminently free  from  difficulties  and  well  founded 
objections. 

POSTSCRIPT   TO   LETTER   I. 

As  the  statements  and  facts  of  this  letter  implj'' 
a  course  of  conduct  by  no  means  honorable  or 
creditable  to  our  Methodist  friends,  it  may  be 
supposed  that  some  kind  of  vindication  has  been 
attempted.  When  the  first  edition  of  this  work 
appeared,  it  was  assailed  by  a  preacher  of  some 
popularity  and  influence,  who  boldly  denied  that 
there  was  any  ''particular  deiignation'^  ©f  th# 


44  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

Presbyterian  church  in  any  of  the  tracts  above 
quoted;  although  "the  Presbyterian  church,"  in 
connection  with  the  Congregational,  is  three 
several  times  distinctly  named,  in  "Duplicity  Ex- 
posed," as  the  object  of  attack.  It  was  also  said 
that  the  tract  just  named  referred  to  a  body 
of  people  somewhere  in  the  East,  known  as 
"the  Associated  Congregational  and  Presbyterian 
churches;"  but  as  no  such  sect  had  ever  before 
been  heard  of,  nor  could  be  shown  to  exist,  this 
evasion  excited  only  ridicule.  These  facis,  how- 
ever, are  of  importance,  as  showing  how  gladly 
even  the  friends  of  Methodism  would  escape 
from  their  unenviable  position,  in  relation  to  the 
Presbyterian  church;  and  the  folly  of  their  expe- 
dients proves  that  they  feel  the  truth  and  force  of 
the  argument  we  have  employed. 

When  the  second  edition  of  the  book  made  its 
appearance,  it  was  bitterly  attacked  by  the 
preacher  located  in  Pittsburgh;  and  in  particular, 
the  statements  of  the  foregoing  letter  were  com- 
mented on.  Mr.  Cooke  (that  was  his  name)  did 
not  venture  so  far  to  expose  himself  to  ridicule, 
as  to  deny  that  "  the  Presbyterian  cliurch"  was 
intended  in  "  Duplicity  Exposed."  We  will 
state  the  substance  of  his  argument,  as  a  literary 
curiosity.  1.  "I  presume  it  was  written  in  New 
England,  and  was  only  intended  to  expose  tlie 


ARMK-rlAN    MBTM0B15M.  4^ 

dnplicify  of  the  guilty."  The  first  part  of  thin 
sentence  might  be  termed  <<the  geographical  ar- 
gument," as  going  to  shc\v  how  much  more  tru: 
a  statement  rMist  necessarily  be,  if  v/ritten  in 
New  England,  rather  than  in  Old  England,  or  in 
'Pennsylvania!  Tlie  second  branch-  of  the  sen^ 
tence  speaks  the  trutli,  but  unfortunately  is  no* 
.thing  to  the  purpose;  for  the  very  question  in  de- 
bate is,  "Who  are  the  guilty?"  referred  to  in  the 
tract.' 

Again:  The  ground  was  taken,  that  only  som9 
such  in  the  Presbyterian  and  Congregational 
churches  were  designed  to  be  exposed.  But 
when  questioned  'through  the  press  what  the 
tract  meant  by  the  phrase,  "BODY  of  people;** 
why  the  frequent  designation  of  "  the  Presbyte** 
rian  church,"  as  the  object  of  remark;  the  men" 
tion  and  misrepresentation  of  her  doctrines ;  tht 
sneer  about  changing  her  standards,  and  publish- 
ing "a  revised  and  improved  edition  of  her  Con* 
fession  of  Faith" — Mr.  C.  was  silent. 

Another  reason  was,  that  "  the  Old  School 
Presbyterians  accuse  the  New  with  maintaining 
doctrines  differing  from  their  Confession."  But 
the  folly  of  this  is  proved,  not  only  by  the  fa«t 
that  "Duplicity  Exposed"  was  written  years  be* 
fore  New  Schoolism  had  any  distinctive  existence 
in  ©UT  ehnreh;  and  the  further  faet,  that  it  e.vjg 


46  TUB    DirnCtJLTlES    OF 

wot  a  word  .about  New  or  Old  School;  but  it 
charges  falsehood  upon  tlie  Presbyterian  church, 
on  the  ground  of  her  acknowledged  doctrines,  as 
has  been  already  shown;  doctrines,  too,  for  the 
most  part,  on  which  Old  and  New  School  har- 
monise. 

Again:  It  was  said  that'two  of  the  above-nion- 
tioned  tracts  ''were  ivrilten  to  show  the  incon- 
sistencies and  unscriptural  character  of  Predesti- 
nation, as  taught  and  believed  in  the  days  of 
their  author,  and  with  no  reference  to  the  Pres- 
byterian church  at  all.^'  Bat  when  interrogated, 
*♦  What  bearing  it  had  upon  the  subject,  when  a 
tract  'was  written,'  any  more  than  where  it 
originated,  provided  it  was  circulated  industri- 
ously among  the  members  of  the  Prcsbylorinn 
church,  attacked  by  name  lier  doctrines,  r{  ferrod 
in  proof  to  her  Confession,  and  garbled  and  mis- 
represented some  of  her  most  popular  writings," 
the  answer  was,  "expressive  silence/'  The  bad- 
ness of  a  cause  is  often  best  seen  in  the  weakness 
of  its  defence. 

Jo;;";   ;.....    ,.i    ,. 


ARMINIAN   METHODISM.  47 

LETTER    n. 

Original  Sin, 
Rev.  Sir: 

Having  shown,  as  we  believe,  to  the  convic- 
tion of  every  candid  mind,  that  we  stand,  in  this 
discussion,  in  the  attitude  of  self-defence,  we  pro- 
ceed without  further  delay,  to  state  and  illustrate 
the  difficulties  of  Methodism. 

I.  The  Difficulties    of    Methodism    in  reference  to 

THE  DOCTRINE  OF  ORIGINAL  SiN.  ThE  VAGUE,  CON- 
FUSED,  AND  CONTRADICTORY  STATEMENTS  MADE  UPON 
THIS    SUBJECT. 

Among  the  articles  of  Religion  as  pubhshed  by 
VVaiigh  &  Mason,  in  1832,  for  tlie  Methodist 
Episcopal  Churcli,  and,  (along  with  the  Disci- 
pline,) recommended  to  all  their  people,  <'nextto 
the  word  of  God,"  the  7th  is  in  the  following 
terms  : 

"Original  Sin  standeth  not  in  the  following  of 
Adam,  (as  the  Pelagians  vainly  talk,)  but  it  is  the 
corruption  of  the  nature  of  every  man,  that  natu- 
rally is  engendered  of  the  offspring  of  Adam, 
whereby  man  is  very  far  gone  from  original 
righteousness,  and  of  his  own  nature  inclined  to 
evil  and  that  continually." 


41  Tfis  »irri€VLTis«  #f 

Tlie  corriiplion  of  nature,  taught  in  lliis  article, 
by  wliicli  "mau  is  inclined  to  evil  and  tliat  con- 
tinually," is  manifestly  llie  fountain  whence  flaws 
all  actual  sin,  tho  root  of  all  bitterness,  an  evil  of 
fearful  mngniUide,  a  curse  of  tremendous  extent. 
Who  then  is  the  guihy  author  of  this  dread  ca- 
lamity, by  wliicli  corruption,  and  misery,  and 
death,  are  handed  down  from  generation  to  gene- 
ration? Is  it  the  infant  or  the  parent?  Must  w^e 
trace  it  back  to  Adam,  the  primitive  ancestor  of 
tliG  race  ;  or  must  we  impute  it  to  the  Creator 
himself?  In  answer  to  these  questions,  the  Me- 
thodist Standard  of  doctrine  says  not  a  word;  and 
the  members  and  ministers  arc  left  to  believe  and 
teach,  upon  tliis  subject,  whatever  is  right  in  their 
own  eyes.  Men  may  adept  their  Articles  and 
Discipline,  and  yet  maintain  that  God  is  the  au- 
thor of  sin,  the  originating  cause  of  that  "corrup- 
tion of  nature"  by  which  "man  is  inclined  to  evil 
and  tliat  continually,"  and  thus  tlie  author  of  all 
sin.  This,  thair  religious  teachers  may  hold  and 
inculcate,  and  yet,  so  fur  as  appears,  be  good 
Methodists.  The  whole  subject  is  submitted  to 
the  freak,  or  fmcy,  or  frenzy,  of  each  individual, 
whotiier  preacher  or  ordinary  member. 

Now,  it  is  well  known  to  be  a  favorite  topic  of 
declamation,  among  these  opposers  of  Presbyteri- 
anism,  that  eiir  system  leads  inevitably  to  the 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  49 

adoption  of  the  fore-mentioned  monstrous  doc- 
trine of  the  origin  of  sin.  Long,  and  loud,  and 
oft-repeated,  are  their  asseverations  to  this  effect; 
and  they  do  not  hesitate,  as  we  have  seen,  to 
charge  those  among  us  who  reject  the  thought 
with  abhorrence,  as  guilty  of  a  want  of  candor,  or 
something  worse.  But  what  says  the  Confession 
of  Faith  of  the  Presbyterian  church  upon  the  sub- 
ject of  the  author  of  sin?  "The  sinfulness  there- 
of, (viz.  of  sinful  actions,)  proceedeth  only  from 
the  creature,  and  not  from  God,  who  being  most 
holy  and  righteous,  neither  is  nor  can  he  the  au- 
thor or  approver  of  sin."  Ch.  v.  Sec.  4.  And 
this,  be  it  remembered,  is  a  declaration,  to  which, 
all  Presbyterian  ministers  and  elders,  at  their  or- 
dination, solemnly  give  their  assent  and  approba- 
tion. A  man  may  be  a  good  preacher  of  Me- 
thodism^he  will  resist  no  regulation  among  men, 
nor  violate  any  ministerial  oath,  who  holds  and 
teaches  that  God  is  the  author  of  sin;  but  the  fun- 
damental principles  of  the  Presbyterian  church 
forever  forbid  to  such  a  person,  an  entrance  into 
her  ministry  or  eldership,  under  the  penalty  of  a 
conscience  perjured  before  earth  and  Heaven. 

Again:  The  "corruption  of  nature"  taught  by 
the  Article  is  necessary  and  unavoidable,  Man 
brings  it  into  the  world  with  him;  and  he  can  no 
more  avoid  being  the  child  of  sinful  parents,  and 


of  course,  the  child  of  a  corruption  by  which  "ho 
is  inclined  to  coiiiinual  evil,"  tliaii  he  can  deter- 
mine the  titne  and  place  of  his  birth.  He  is 
therefore  necessarily  and  unavoidably,  "without 
any  preceding  fault  or  offence  of  his,"  "very  far 
gone  from  original  righteousness,  and  inclined  to 
evil  and  that  continually."  But  Dr.  W.  Fisk, 
speaking  as  the  organ  of  the  General  Conference, 
and  making  a  mortal  thrust  at  the  doctrine  of  Pre- 
destination, tells  us,  "If  God  holds  men  respon- 
sible for  what  is  unavoidable  *  what  more  could 
be  said  of  the  most  merciless  tyrant?"  (Disc,  on 
Predes.  p.  13.)  It  follows,  therefore,  that  though 
"man  is  inclined  to  evil  and  that  continually," 
yet  he  is  not  "responsible"  for  this  wickedness, 
because  it  is  unavoidable:  in  other  words,  "Ori- 
ginal Sin"  is  no  sin,  but  a  very  innocent  harmless 
thing  which  none  but  a  "merciless  tyrant"  would 
ever  consider  deserving  of  punishment! 


*  Let  the  reader  compare,  and  reconcile,  if  he  can, 
the  following'  statements:  '■'■Evtry  punishment  supposes 
the  ofFcnder  might  have  avoided  the  offence  for  which  he 
is  puni-^hcd;  otherwise,  to  punish  him  would  be  palpably 
unjust.''^  Wesley,  quoted  by  Watson— Tliool.  Inst.  v.  2, 
p.  444.  Ag-ain:  "If  they  mean  that  the  guilt  or  the  pun- 
ishment  of  Adam's  sin  is  charfred  vpon  his  xvhole  paste, 
rity,  a  main  part  of  which  punishment  licth  in  that  on- 
ginal  dejilcment  wlierein  they  are  all  concerned  and  horn, 
let  it  pass."  Goodwin,  quoted  and  approved  by  Watson, 
Tol.  3,  p.  233. 


ARSWNIAN    METHODISM-  51 

Nevertheless,  Dr.  Fisk  further  assures  us, 
(p.  30,)  that  "all  depravity,  whether  derived  or 
contracted,  is  damning  in  its  nature."  Here  we 
are  back  on  the  old  ground:  Original  Sin  is  uiia- 
votWaZj/e— therefore  it  is  no  sin;  but  still  it  is 
''damning  in  its  nature!'"  How  is  this?  The 
Dr.  will  tell  us:  ''Guilt  is  not  imputed^  until  by 
a  voluntary  rejection  of  the  Gospel  remedy,  man 
makes  the  depravity  of  his  nature  the  object  of 
his  choice."  "By  a  voluntary  rejection  of  the 
Gospel  remedy?"  But,  Rev.  Dr.,  does  not  your 
7th  Article  teach  "  a  corruption  of  nature  by. 
which  man  is  inclined  to  evil  and  that  continu- 
ally?" And  if  he  be  inclined  to  continual  evil, 
then  is  he  inclined  to  this  very  evil  of  rejecting 
the  Gospel  remedy.  It  is  idle,  therefore,  on  your 
own  principles,  to  talk  of  a  voluntary  (or  sinful) 
rejection  of  the  Gospel  remedy,  when  man  is  ne- 
cessarily and  unavoidably  inclined  to  reject  it. 
Of  course  it  can  be  no  sin  to  reject  it;  and  God 
would  be  a  "merciless  tyrant"  to  "impute  guilt" 
for  rejecting  the  remedy.  How  then  can  a  de- 
pravity which  none  can  avoid,  which  none  but 
"merciless  tyranny"  could  regard  as  deserving 
of  punishment,  be  said  to  be  "  damning  in  its 
nature?" 

In  reply  to  this  reasoning,  a  writer  in  defence 
of  ©r.  Fisk,  whilst  a«lEuiilinj  that  maw  m   by 


52  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

nature  unavoidably  inclined  to  "continual  evil,*' 
and  of  course  to  the  evil  of  rejecting  the  Gospel 
remedy — asserting  too  that  this  destroys  the  free- 
dom of  his  will,  and  "that  it  would  be  mockery 
for  the  Divine  Being  to  set  before  him  life  and 
death,  and  invite  him  to  choose  life,  when  he  teas 
morally  incapable  of  such  a  choice''' — yet  thinks 
he  relieves  the  subject  of  the  difficulty,  by  stating 
that  "Dr.  F.  assumes  man  as  graciously  assisted 
to  make  a  voluntary  choice."  In  other  words, 
man  is  by  birth  the  heir  of  a  depravity  wliich 
^^unavoidably  inclines  him  to  continual  evil."  It 
follows,  therefore,  according  to  Dr.  F.,  that  lie 
has  no  power  of  voluntary  choice,  and  is  not  a 
free  moral  agent,  until  "  graciously  assisted,'''' 
and  made  capable  of  voluntary  choice — and  thus, 
the  Dr.  continues,  "through  the  grace  of  the 
Gospel,  all  are  born  free  from  condemnation" — 
p.  30.  Which  is  about  the  same  as  to  say,  that 
man  is  enabled  "6?/  grace'''  to  escape  a  condem- 
nation which,  being  previously  unavoidable,  it 
would  have  been  merciless  tyranny  to  execute. 
A  wondrous  act  o{  grace,  truly,  to  assist  the  sin- 
ner to  avoid  a  punishment  which  none  but  a  tyrant 
could  inflict!  A  strange  idea  of  tlie  grace  of  the 
Gospel,  that  it  comes  in  to  render  men  capable  of 
sinning,  deserving  of  punishment  for  their  sin, 
an^  liable  to  a  "condemuation*'  which^  but  for 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  53 

this  grace,  a  righteous  God  could  not  justly  exe- 
cute upon  any  descendant  of  the  apostate  pair! 

Let  the  impartial  inquirer  look  again  at  these 
singular  though  legitimate  resLilts  of  the  doctrinal 
positions  assumed  by  the  Conference  and  Dr. 
Fisk.  "That  Christ  died  for  our  sins  according 
to  the  Scriptures,"  is  a  fundamental  principle  of 
Christianity.  But,  according  to  Dr.  F.,  Christ 
did  not  come  into  the  world  to  "save  from  sin," 
but  rather  to  put  men  into  a  capacity  of  sinning; 
as  it  is  in  consequence  of  his  death  alone  that 
guilt  becomes  chargeable  upon  any  individual  of 
the  race,  excepting  only  our  first  parents.  If 
these  be  not  lawful  conclusions  from  the  premises, 
it  is  hard  to  say  what  is  the  meaning  of  the  lan- 
guage employed  by  Arminians.  1.  All  the  child- 
ren of  men  are  born  with  "a  corruption  of  nature," 
whereby  they  are  "inclined  to  evil  and  that  con- 
tinually." 2.  This  corruption  and  inclination  to 
continual  evil  are  necessary  and  unavoidable. 
3.  If  God  should  hold  them  responsible  for  what 
is  unavoidable,  he  would  be  a  "merciless  tyrant;" 
for  it  would  be  to  punish  a  man  who  possessed 
no  "freedom  of  will,"  and  who  was  "morally  in- 
capable of  a  good  choice."  But  4.  Through  the 
grace  of  the  atonement,  man  is  born  free  from  the 
grasp  and  condemnation  of  "the  merciless  tyrant," 
his  "  freedom  of  will"  is  restored,  and  he  is 
5 


54  THE   DIFFICI'LTIES    OF 

•'graciously  assisted  to  make  a  voluntary  or  sinful 
choice."     But  if  these  things  are  so,  then  it  is 
plain  that  independently  of  the  death  of  Christ, 
and  the  grace   of  the   Gospel,  men  could  never 
have  been  chargeable  with  sin ;  and  of  course 
Christ  did  not  die  to  atone  for  the  sins  of  any  of 
the  fallen  race,  except  our  lirst  parents,  since, 
hut  for  his  death  and  the  grace  accompanying 
it,  no  others  could  have  sinned,  or  at  least  their 
sins  being  unavoidable,  they  would  not  have  been 
"responsible"  for  them.     But  if  this  is  so,  it  will 
follow  that  the  ''grace  of  the  Gospel,"  instead  of 
being  any  real  favor  towards   mankind,  is  the 
greatest  curse  that  could  ever  befall  them.     If, 
without  the  bestowment  of  grace,  men  could  not 
have  been  held  ''responsible^^  for  their  conduct, 
they  would  have  remained  IVee  from  criminality, 
the  righteousness  of  God  could  never  have  suf- 
fered them  to  be  sent  to  hell ;  and  his  goodness, 
we   may  suppose,  would  have   bestowed  upon 
them  eternal  life.     But  now,  alas!  in  consequence 
of  the  coming  of  Christ,  and  o^  grace  being  given 
them  to  deliver  them  from  unavoidable  sin  and 
"merciless  tyranny" — now  they  are  all  expo'  ed 
to  inexcusable  bhime  and  endless  ruin!!! 

Again  :  Dr.  Fisk  and  the  Conference  teach, 
that  it  is  by  "  virtue  of  the  atonement,"  and 
"throH;rii  (lie  graec  of  the  Gospel,"  that  "sll  ar« 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  &5 

born  free  from  condemnation,"  and  ''guilt  is  not 
imputed" — meaning  the  guilt  of  "derived  de- 
pravity," or  the  "corruption  of  nntiire"  derived 
from  Adam,  by  which  "man  is  inclined  to  con- 
tinual evil."  But  if  this  corruption  be  ^'imavoid- 
abfe,^^  what  need  of  the  grace  of  the  atonement 
to  prevent  the  imputation  of  guilt  on  its  account? 
What  need  of  grace  to  prevent  'merciless  tyranny' 
under  the  government  of  a  holy  and  merciful 
God? 

Again:  If  this  derived  depravity  be  necessary 
and  unavoidable,  where  was  the  ^^grace^^  in 
Christ's  dying  to  "countera  t  its  destructive  ef- 
fects?" If  we  must  suppose  "the  shedding  of 
blood"  in  some  way  necessary  to  save  man  from 
being  held  "responsible"  for  unavoidable  corrup- 
tion; or  in  other  words,  to  save  him  from  "merci- 
less tyranny,"  it  would  seem  rather  an  act  of 
justice,  both  to  God  and  the  creature.  The  Lord 
of  the  whole  earth  OWES  it  to  himself  to  DO 
RIGHT.  To  say  then  that  "through  the  grace 
of  the  Gospel  all  are  born  free  from  a  condemna- 
tion" which  none  but  a  tyrant  could  execute,  is 
to  confound  all  distinction  between  those  rights 
which  eternal  justice  exacts,  and  the  unmerited 
favors  which  grace  freely  bestows.  It  is  in  fact 
to  resolve  the  whole  scheme  of  mercy  into  the 
payment  of  a  DEBT,  at  least  so  far  as  it  respects 


56  THB   DIFFICULTIES   QM 

all  the  offspring  of  Adam.  But  we  need  not  say 
how  utterly  subversive  is  such  a  view  of  the  first 
principles  of  the  Gospel,  which  is  continually  re- 
presented as  the  blessed  fruit  of  the  most  distin- 
guished love,  as  the  "unspeakable  gift"  of  pure 
unmerited  mercy.  Thus  does  Dr.  Fisk's  great 
argument  against  tlic  doctrine  of  decrees  (whether 
correcdy  or  incorrectly  applied,  we  inquire  not 
now,)  recoil  upon  himself.  Like  him  of  old,  who 
defied  the  armies  of  Israel,  Arminiani?m  loses 
her  head  by  the  stroke  of  her  own  favorite 
sword. 

Further:  The  circumstances  attending  the  birth 
and  character  of  infants  under  the  Gospel,  over- 
throw Dr.  F's  statement,  that  "guilt  is  not  im- 
puted until  a  voluntary  rejection  of  the  Gospel 
remedy."  It  must  be  admitted  that  they  arc 
"shapen  in  iniquity,"  IN  SIN  they  are  conceiv- 
ed, and  are  ''by  nature  the  children  of  wrath." 
Neither  can  it  be  denied  that  they  are  liable  to 
suffer  all  the  usual  wants  and  woes  which  attend 
fallen  humanity,  and  even  the  most  excruciating 
forms  of  misery  and  death.  But  could  these  facts 
exist,  under  the  government  of  a  holy  God,  if 
"guilt  is  not  imputed"  to  them?  Can  guWless 
creatures  be  exposed  to  all  these  forms  of  the 
CURSE?  If  it  be  said  that  all  this  falls  very  far 
f\\oxi  of  eternal  d«'^ath,  we  answer,  in  ths  words  of 


ARfilNIAN    METHODISM.  57 

Richard  Watson — "If  the  makhig  the  descend- 
ants of  Adam  liable  to  eternal  death,''^  for  una- 
voidable sin,  "be  unjust,"  (an  act  of  "merciless 
tyranny,")  the  "infliction  of  temporal  death  is  so 
also,  the  duration  of  the  punishment  making  no 
difference  in  the  simple  question  of  justice.  If 
punishment,  whether  of  loss  or  of  pain^  be  un- 
just, its  measure  or  duration  may  be  a  greater  or 
less  injustice;  but  it  is  unjust  in  every  degree." 
Theol.  Inst.  vol.  2,  pp.  55,  56.  On  the  authority 
of  their  own  favorite  Watson,  therefore,  it  is  plain 
that  Dr.  F.  and  the  Conference  would  not  more 
surely  charge  tlie  Creator  with  injustice,  if  they 
held  the  horrible  dogma  of  "infant  damnation," 
than  by  maintaining  their  present  views  of  the 
corruption,  misery,  and  death  of  infants,  while 
they  are  chargeable  only  with  sin  which  they 
could  not  avoidi  or  rather  have  no  guilt  imputed 
to  them  at  all! 

"It  lias  been  established,"  says  Watson,  (vol.  2, 
p.  67,)  "that  the  FULL  PENALTY  of  Adam's 
offence  passed  upon  his  posterity."  And  he 
elsewhere  admits  that  "Paul  represents  ALL 
MEN  under  condemnation,  in  consequence  of 
their  connection  with  the  first  Adam;"  and  again, 
that  "by  one  man's  disobedience  many  were 
made,  constituted,  accounted,  and  dealt  with  as 
sinners,  and  treated  as  though  they  themseh^ 


58  TiiK  DiTFicrLTrts  cwr 

had  actually  sinned:''  p.  397,  54,  55.  The  full 
penally  which  has  passed  upon  all  men  to  their 
condemnation,  he  represents  (p.  55)  as  consisting 
in  three  things.     1.  "The  death  of  the  body." 

2.  "Death  sjnrituaV — "thus  it  is  the  heart  is  de- 
ceitful above  all  things  and  desperately  wicked." 

3.  "A  third  consequence  is,  eternal  death f  or, 
as  the  language  is  varied  on  page  399,  "a  condi- 
tional liability  to  eternal  death."*  Now,  it  will 
scarcely  be  denied  that  these  are  evils  of  the  most 
awful  character  that  can  befall  mankind,  being 
nothing  less  than  death  temporal,  spiritual,  and 
eternal.  And  we  are  told  that  they  have  passed 
upon  men,  as  the  "full  penalty"  or  righteous 
"condemnation"  of  Adam's  offence,  in  conse- 
quence of  a  conneclion  with  him  which  they 
could  not  escape,  if  they  were  born  at  all.  Here 
then  is  a  triple  curse,  including  death  temporal, 
and  spiritual,  and  a  liability  to  eternal  death, 
which    no    descendant   of  Adam   has   power  to 

*  We  liave  taken  the  liberty  of  examining'  with  some 
care,  the  Institutes  of  Watson,  and  in  many  particulars 
liave  found  the  work  inconsistent  with  truth,  and  with 
itself;  yet  it  is  due  to  candor  to  state,  that  compared  with 
the  writings  of  Whitby,  and  some  other  Arminians,  his 
scheme  may  be  regarded  as  approaching  the  truth.  On 
the  doctrine  of  Original  Sin,  and  on  some  other  points,  he 
employs  language  wliich,  in  many  particulars,  if  it  is  to 
be  understood  according  to  common  usage,  is  substantial 
Calvinism. 


ARMINIAK   MSTHODISH.  59 

avoid,  and  which  is  visited  upon  every  child  of 
his,  ''en  account  of  sin"  which  is  absolutely  "un- 
avoidable," in  consequence  of  his  connection  with 
his  first  parents.  We  leave  Dr.  Fisk  and  his  ad- 
mirers to  inform  the  public,  whether  this  be  the 
arrangement  of  a  most  •'  merciless  tyrant;"  or 
whether,  in  their  zeal  against  Predestination,  they 
have  not  digged  a  ditch  and  fallen  into  it  them- 
selves. 

Again :  The  three-fold  penalty  which  has 
passed  upon  all  men  on  account  of  unavoidable 
sin,  we  are  further  told  by  Watson,  is  relieved 
by  the  fact  that  "all  are  born  under  a  constitution 
of  mercy,  which  actually  existed  before  their 
birth:"  vol.  2,  p.  898.  "A  constitution  of 
MERCY!"  Mercy  for  what,  and  for  whom? 
Why,  for  men  who  are  implicated  in  sin,  for 
which,  Dr.  Fisk  says,  none  but  a  tyrant  could 
hold  them  "responsible,"  it  being  ^ ''Unavoidable J*^ 
We  submit  to  these  gentlemen  the  task  of  show- 
ing the  infinite  MERCY  and  grace,  of  the  plan 
by  which  men  are  saved  from  the  penalty  and 
condemnation  of  the  divine  law;  while  at  the 
same  time  they  assure  us,  that  to  leave  them  in 
that  state  would  be  an  act  of  high-handed  injus- 
tice and  "tyranny."  Truly,  ^ace  is  no  more 
grace,  according  to  this  scheme.  It  is  hardly 
strict  juertice,  or  the  payment  of  a  -moral  debL 


Od  THB    DIFFICULTIES    Of 

It  supposes  the  ever-blessed  God  to  create  men 
under  an  arrangement  of  his  Providence,  by 
which  all  are  plunged  into  an  abyss  of  unavoid- 
able sin  and  condemnation.  It  then  supposes 
him  to  provide  a  "constitution  of  mercy,"  by 
\vhich  only  soine  are  saved;  whereas,  if  they  had 
only  been  let  alone,  and  no  constitution  of  mercy 
and  grace  provided,  they  would  have  had  no 
"freedom  of  will,"  could  not  righteously  have 
been  held  "responsible"  for  their  sins,  being  un- 
avoidable^ and  consequently,  they  would  have 
been  blameless  and  harmless,  without  rebuke, 
and  of  course,  unexposed  to  misery  either  here  or 
hereafter. 

It  will  not  relieve  the  Arminian  scheme  of  these 
inconsistencies  to  say,  with  Dr.  Fisk  and  the 
Conference,  that  Adam  was  our  "  federal  head," 
and  that  "by  liis  unnecessitated  sin,  he,  and  in 
him  all  his  posterity,  became  obnoxious  to  the 
curse  of  the  divine  law."  This  is  true;  and  it 
affords  the  Calvinist  a  strong  and  consistent 
ground  of  defence,  that  by  "one  man  sin  entered, 
and  so  death  has  passed  upon  all  men,  in  ivhom 
all  have  sinned."  But  what  relief  will  the  repre- 
sentative character  of  Adam  bring  the  Arminian? 
Just  none  at  all.  It  enables  him  to  remove  tl.e 
difficulty  only  further  back,  and  exhibits  the  ever- 
bleslsed  God  as  constituting  a  federal  relationship 


JLfeMINIAN    liETHODlSM.  01 

between  Adam  and  his  posterity,  according  to 
which,  the  ''triple  curse^^  is  visited  upon  all  his 
descendants,  as  the  penalty  or  condemnation  of 
sin  which,  as  to  them,  was  absolutely  imavoid- 
tibh  and  necessary.  Thus  the  "merciless  tyran- 
ny" which  Dr.  Fisk  so  deeply  reprobates,  is  re- 
duced to  a  system,  is  provided  for  by  divine  con- 
stitution;* or,  if  that  be  denied,  is  provided  for  in 
the  order  of  nature  and  Providence  originally  in- 
stamped  upon  creation!  And  then,  to  crown  the 
whole  scheme  of  contradiction,  "a  constitution  of 
?32crri/"  is  introduced,  the  results  of  which  prove 
to  be,  according  to  this  theory,  a  far  greater  curse 
than  the  original  calamity! 

That  we  have  not  misunderstood  the  Arminian 
views  on  this  subject,  is  further  evident  from  the 
following  argument,  which  we  have  abridged 
from  Watson's  Institutes — vol.  2,  pages  437,  '38. 
"//  is  not  denied  that  the  will,  in  its  purely 
naiural  state,  and  independent  of  all  GRACE, 
can  incline  only  to  evil.  But  the  question  is, 
whether  it  is  so  left;  and  whether,  if  this  be  con- 
tended for,  from  whatever  cause  it  may  arise^ 
whether  from  the  influence  of  circumstances,  or 
co-action,  or  from  its  own  invincible  depravity, 
it  renders  him  PUISISHABLE   who  never  had 

*  Watson,  ailer  Arminius,  calls   it   a   "Covenant:'* 
Vol,  S,  p.  78. 


65  TI!K    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

the  nifiaiis  of  preventing  liis  will  from  lapsing  into 
this  diseased  atul  vitiated  state,  who  was  born 
with  this  moral  disease?"  &lc.  "We  reply," 
says  Watson,  '-that  this  is  onli/  true  when  the 
time  of  tri.d  is  past,  as  in  devils  and  apostates; 
and  fhen  onltj  because  they  are  personctUy  guilty 
of  havin.ii;'  so  vitiated  tlieir  wills,"  &c.  •  "They 
tiiemselves  are  Jusflij  chargeable  with  this  state 
of  their  wills,  and  all  tlie  evils  resulting  from  it. 
But  the  case  is  widely  different  with  men  who, 
by  iheir  hereditary  corruption,  and  the  fall  of  hu- 
man nature,  to  which  they  were  not  consenting 
parties,  are  born  with  a  will  averse  to  all  good." 
But  if  this  be  a  correct  view  of  the  subject,  it  fol- 
lows necessarily  that  if  men  had  been  left  in  that 
"purely  natural  state,"  and  the  children  of  Adam 
had  been  born  v/ithout  any  interference  of  grace, 
without  any  atonement,  they  could  not  have  been 
"Ae/./  to  he  culpahJe;^^  they  would  not  have  been 
"PUNISHABLE"  for  original  depravity,  nor 
"for  any  of  the  evils  resulting  from  it."  So  that 
if  the  posterity  of  Adam  had  only  been  so  fortu- 
nate as  to  have  had  no  grace  provided  for  them, 
not  a  soul  of  tliem  could  have  been  cidpable,  or 
punishable.  So  that  to  grace  we  must  impute  all 
the  guilt  and  misery  wliich  have  ever  hefdlen 
men,  excepting  only  our  lirst  parents,  who  be- 
came sinners  without  grace.     And  even  Adam 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  03 

and  Eve,  as  we  will  presently  show,  could  not 
have  committed,  according  to  tl.is  sclieme,  more 
than  the  first  transgression,  inasmuch  as  it  is 
expressly  affirmed  that  they  thereby  lost  their 
^'freedom  of  ivlll,''^  which  was  restored  by  grace! 
From  all  which  it  follov/s  that  "the  grace  of  the 
Gospel"  was  indeed  a  gre?A  favor,  so  far  as  re- 
spects the  pardon  of  the  first  sin,  but  that  ever 
since,  it  has  been  "  evil  and  only  evil  continu- 
ally!" 

But  perhaps  the  Arminian  will  reply,  that  but 
for  the  grace  provided  in  the  atonement  of  Christ, 
Adam  must  have  spcedil}'  perished,  and  of  course 
could  have  had  no  posterity.  "Had  our  first  pa- 
rents," says  Watson,  (vol.  2,  p.  395,)  "  died  '/n 
the  day^  they  sinned,  v/Iiich,  but  for  the  introduc- 
tion of  a  system  of  mercy  and  long  suffering,  for 
any  thing  that  appears,  ihey  must  have  done,  the 
human  race  would  have  perished  with  them,"  &c. 
And  on  page  398,  he  speaks  of  the  opposite 
opinion  as  a  Calvinistic  "assumption" — "one  of 
the  great  and  leading  mistakes"  of  the  Calvinists, 
and  as  great  presumption  to  assume  it  as  a  truth, 
that  they  would  have  multiplied  tlieir  species  only 
for  eternal  destruction,  liut  if  Arminians  cor- 
rectly describe  their  own  system,  it  is  obvious 
that,  so  far  as  respects  the  posterity  of  Adam,  the 
probability  of  their  existence  would  havg  been  at 


64  THB   DIFFICULTIES   OF 

least  as  great  without  grace  as  under  the  provi- 
sions of  the  atonement,  since  in  the  former  case 
the  worst  that  could  have  occurred  was,  that  they 
would  have  heen  neither  culpable  nor  punis/iable 
for  their  conduct.  And  certainly  we  ma^  as- 
sume that  it  would  not  be  less  worthy  of  the  Di- 
vine Being  to  bring  all  men  into  being  in  a  guilt- 
less state,  where  they  would  deserve  neither 
blame  nor  punishment^  than  to  create  them  under 
an  arrangement  of  GRACE,*  in  which  they  are 
all  "  conceived  in  sin  and  shapen  in  iniquity," 
and  thousands  are  infallibly  certain  to  be  for  ever 
punished  for  their  sin.  And  with  respect  to 
Adam,  even  admitting  Watson  to  be  right  in  af- 
firming that  "the  sentence  of  death  was  to  be  exe- 
cuted in  the  self-same  day"t  of  his  transgression, 
yet  as  we  are  told  that  from  that  period  "he  had 
no  freedom  of  will  left,"  except  ''by  grace,''  it  is 

*  It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  whilst  Dr.  Fisk  tells  us 
that  "through  the  grace  of  the  Gospel  all  are  horn  free  from 
condemnation,"  Watson,  on  the  contrary,  affirms  that  the 
Gospel  provision  "■does  not  affect  the  state  in  tohich  men 
are  6orr</"  p.  67.  And  p.  58,  that  they  "are  born  under 
the  whole  male  diction!'''     Doctors  dilFcr. 

t  President  Edwards  has  shown  conclusively,  tliat  the 
use  of  this  expression  among  the  Hehrews,  does  not  ne- 
cessarily signify  that  the  execution  of  the  sentence  should 
be  within  24  hours  from  the  act,  particularly  not  the  pun. 
isbment  in  its  utmost  extent.  Compare  Ezek;  33 :12, 13. 
I  Kinga  2 :  37.    Original  Sin,  pp.  136,  '37. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  65 

evident  that  however  long  he  had  lived,  he  could 
have  committed  no  more  sin.  And  as  by  the 
showing  of  Watson  himself,  the  original  law  did 
not  demand  instantaneous  punishment,  but  would 
have  been  satisfied  v/ith  the  execution  of  its 
threatening  at  any  time  "in  the  day"  of  trans- 
gression, it  can  never  be  shown  that  the  same 
sovereignty  which  might  justly  have  granted  a 
respite  of  a  day,  could  not  have  added  a  month, 
or  a  year,  or  many  years,  to  beings  who  would 
have  been  perfectly  free  from  sin  during  the 
whole  term,  and  who  would  have  propagated  a 
race  of  men  meriting  neither  blame  nor  punish- 
m,ent.  But  whatever  we  may  think  of  this  mat- 
ter, it  is  plain  that  Watson's  great  argument 
against  "the  Calvinistic  assumption"  must  fall  to 
the  ground.  On  Arminian  principles,  it  is  evi- 
dent the  oflspring  of  Adam  could  never  have 
sinned  at  all,  if  they  had  not  become  sinners  by 
grace! 

Further:  The  Arminian  notion  of  the  freedom 
of  the  will  implies  "indifference;"  or,  in  the  lan- 
guage of  President  Edwards,  "that  equilibrium 
whereby  the  will  is  free  from  all  antecedent  bias.'* 
But  owing  to  the  full,  man  becoming  "inclined  to 
evil  and  that  continually,"  could  have  no  such 
freedom  of  will;  therefore  he  was  no  longer  a  free 
agent;  therefore  he  could  commit  no  more  sin, 
6 


'ilCLLTlLi    or 


f ;;'  noni  but  a  free  a(;ent.  can  be  juslly  cliargeall'j 
\.  I'.h  I'n.e  octiial  violation  of  law.     But  this  i-l;ort 
IV) J  easy  metliod  of  arriving  at  "sinless  perfec- 
tion/' was  iinfortuiialely  nipped  in  the  bud  by  the 
grace  of  the  Gospel,  by  which  liis  freedom  \vas 
rest;  r  jd,  and  he  graciously  enabled  to  sin!     V/at- 
ioa  admits  the  fact,  as  above  stated.     Hence  he 
qtiotos  Anuinius,  teaching  "that  the  will  of  man 
'  i  li  respect  to  true  good,  is  captivated,  destroy^ 
.  ',  niid  LOkST,  and  Jicts  ?w  powers  whatever,  cx- 
i  .pt  c-uch  as  are  excited  by  grace;"  calls  it  "an 
i.jvincible  iaclinalion  to  evil;"  and  aflirms  that  the 
will,  "in  its  purely  natural  state,"  "(JAN  incline 
only  to  evil."     He  also  clearly  teaches,  that  left 
i:\  ihat  state,  the  children  of  Adam  Would  not  be 
■pii;)l,Ji(ibU   for   any  act  i.^Grfornicd   in  those  cir- 
.  ::;K;iances.     If  it  be  objected  that  on  this  prin- 
ij>lc  Satan  and  his  angels,  iiaving  lost  their  l\'ee- 
C:  5-p,   of  indilTerence,  and  having  no  grace  pro- 
\  idod  for  them,  can  sin  no  more,  he^replies,  that 
"  i!ift  original  act  being  their  ovrn   and  being  in 
their  ])ower,  they  are  justly  chargeable  wiih  the 
estate  of  their  v/ills,  and  all  the  evils  resulting  from 
i?."     I'ut  can  it  be  truly  said  that  a  servant  is 
gailiy  in  not  using  hands  which  he  does  not  pos- 
tH.':ss,  even  supposing  Imn  to  have  lost  them  by 
ciiiuinul  conduct?     Or  if  we  suppos-e   a  man  by 
^  ■  ■ .'  ■^■:f.  fault  to  deprive  ]ii;n?elf  of  reason,  can 


any  person  imagine  that  ho  would  be  alterwarJ^ 
boon:!  to  pevforvu  moral  acts,  of  which  ha  has  be- 
come uttevly  incapable;  or  th-at  he  coiild  be  pun- 
ibiied  for  not  performing  ihsm,  an.l  made  to  siuTer 
eterna!  torments  for  tlie  neglect,  just  as  ihoagli  Ijg 
v/ere  in  possession  of  all  the  necessary  pov,'ers  of 
moral  agency?*  The  same  reasoning  applies  to 
the  rase  of  our  first  parents,  after  they  had  lost 
'heir  freedom  of  indiflcrenee.  Their  first  siu 
must  have  been  their  last,  but  for  graceJ 

Tliat  v/8  have  not  been  drav/ing  a  carricati'rc 
of  the  doctrinal  views  of  Arminian  Methodism,  in 
further  apparent  from  the  foliowiiig  extracts  from 
the  stereotyped  volume  of  doetrinal  traets,  which 
were  originally  bound  up  with  the  Discipline. 
'^V/e  say,  man  hath  his  fi-eodom  of  will,  not  natu- 
rally but  bi/  grace,''  '^Wc  believe  that  in  th-3 
moment  Adam  fell,  he  had  no  freedom  of  tcitl 
if'.'^  And  after  quoting  Baxter,  and  the  Presby- 
t'irir.n  C(  nt''^;ssion  of  Faith,  eh.  1- — ''God  hath 
endowed  the  vvill  t)f  man  v/ith  that  natural  liberty, 
that  it  i.3  neither  forced,  nor  by  any  absolute  ne- 
cesbity  determined  to  good  or  evil" — the  writer 
(Wesley)  adds — '\Sure  here  is  as  much  said  for 

*  For  an  fibJo  discussion  of  this  poirit,  the  reader  iij 
rcfcjrcd  to  tho  "iiiblic^I  Repertory,"  conducted  princi^. 
rally  by  tho  Profesborii  at  Princeton,  N.  J.  Soo  the  July 
No.j  ly3l. 


08  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

free  will  as  any  man  need  to  say,  and  perhaps 
more:'"  p.  154.  Presbyterians  are  more  liberal 
in  tbeir  views  of  human  liberty  than  Methodist 
Arminians,  or  at  least  say  *'as  much  as  any  man 
need  to  say."  We  leave  it  to  the  Arminians' 
conscience  to  reconcile,  with  this  admission,  all 
the  "hard  speeches"  which  they  have  uttered 
against  us,  for  denying  "free  agency,"  and  repre- 
senting man  as  a  mere  machine,  which  acts  only 
as  it  is  acted  upon. 

On  the  same  general  subject,  hear  the  great 
Oracle  of  Methodism,  Dr.  Adam  Clarke.  "Had 
man  been  left  just  as  he  was  when  he  fell  from 
God,  he,  in  all  probability,  had  been  utterly  un- 
salvable;  as  he  appears  to  have  lost  all  his  spiritual 
light  and  understanding,  and  even  his  moral  feel- 
ing.'*^ "As  they  (Adam  and  Eve)  were,  so  would 
have  been  all  their  posterity,  had  not  some  gra- 
cious principle  been  supernaturally  restored  to 
enlighten  their  minds,  to  give  them  some  know- 
ledge of  good  and  evil,  of  right  and  wrong,  of 
virtue  and  vice,  and  thus  bring  them  into  a  sal- 
vable  state."     (Discourses,  p.  77.) 

Adam  and  Eve,  therefore,  and  all  their  poste- 
rity, v»'ere  brought  by  the  fall  into  that  estate,  in 
which  they  had  "no  moral  feeling,  no  knowledge 
of  right  and  wrong."  If  so,  they  were  not  moral 
agents,  and  could  perform  neither  holy  nor  unholy 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  6P 

acts;  they  could  sin  no  more,  until  grace  restored 
their  freedom,  and  enabled  mankind  to  commit 
all  the  sin  that  has  flowed  from  the  first  trans- 
gression. Thus  God  is  represented  as  the  author 
of  all  sin  since  the  fall!  The  society  of  devils, 
moreover,  according  to  this  theory,  is  as  pure, 
from  actual  sin,  as  that  of  the  angels  around  the 
eternal  throne!  Nor  is  it  conceivable  that,  on 
this  plan,  there  can  be  any  punishment  of  a  sinful 
being,  who  in  the  act  of  sin  has  blotted  out  con- 
science, moral  feeling,  and  all  sense  of  right  and 
wrong,  unless  there  be  also  punishment  by 
grace! 

The  result  of  the  whole  is,  that  we  have  origi- 
nal sin  which  is  no  sin — depravity  without  fault, 
"  inclination  to  evil"  without  criminality,  the 
penalty  of  the  law  inflicted  upon  those  who  are 
not  subjects  of  law,  and  wondrous  '-grace"  to  de- 
liver us  from  a  punishment  which  we  do  not  de- 
serve! Such  is  the  jargon  which  is  published  by 
the  highest  authority,  as  the  approved  doctrinal 
views  of  the  Methodist  church. 

But  perhaps  there  is  no  view  of  original  de- 
pravity more  important,  than  its  connection  with 
the  moral  character  and  future  destiny  of  infants, 
especially  those  that  die  previously  to  their  ar- 
rival at  the  age  of  moral  action.  It  has  long  been 
a  favorite  device  of  sectarian  zeal,  to  misreprM«nt 
6* 


70  THE  DirF'cuLTir.s  of 

nnd  hold  np  to  abhorrcnro,  \hc  views  of  the  Vvcf- 
bylcrian  cliurcli  upon  this  topic.  Wc  arc  cliar>;ed 
M'ith  mainiainiiig  tlie  everlasting  perdi'don  of  help- 
less mfants,*  principally  on  two  grounds:  1 .  be- 
cause our  Confession  no  where  expressly  arftniis, 
that  all  who  die  in  infancy  are  saved.  But  docs 
the  Methodist  Book  of  Discipline  tciich,  l]:at  all 
dying  in  infancy  are  saved?  No  where.  Of 
course  it  follows  by  the  same  argument,  tliat  llic 
preachers  must  hold  infant  damnation.  And 
what  seems  to  render  tliis  more  probable,  is,  that 
in  the  form  of  baptism  (p.  102,  Discip.)  they  are 
taught  to  so  that  "  all  men  are  conceived  and 
born  i  I  sin,  '  and  "to  call  upon  God  the  Falh'^r, 
through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  of  his  boun- 
teous mercy  he  icill  grant  to   this   child  (hat 

*  "Having  pressed  the  aj;e  orfrly,"  remirlis  the  Prosi- 
dent  of  one  of  oar  Theological  Scminario?,  "and  been  coji- 
vcrsant  for  thiriy  years  with  tlic  most  approved  Ciilviti- 
istic  writers,  and  personally  acquainted  with  m.my  of  the 
most  distinguished  Calvinistic  divines  iu  New  England, 
and  in  the  middle,  southern,  and  western  st^itc-,  I  n.iu- 1 
say  that  I  have  never  seen  or  heard  of  any  book  wliicli 
contained  such  a  sentiment,  nor  a  man,  minister  or  lav- 
man,  who  believed  or  taught  it.  And  I  feci  authcrizcd  to 
say,  that  Calvinists,  as  a  body,  are  as  far  frciu  teach iir^ 
infant  damnation  as  any  of  those  who  falsely  accuf^e 
ihcm.  And  I  would  earjiestly  and  airecliun;itcly  reeotn- 
mcnd  to  all  persons  ncciu-tomed  to  propagate  t.'iis  slander^ 
that  they  commit  to  memory  withou  deloy  the  ninth 
commandment — 'Thou  shalt  not  bear  false  witncs?  ngainst 
thy  noijhbor.'" 


ARMIMAN    METKODISM.  71 

ti'hh'h  by  na'iurehc  cannot  liavef''  that  lie  would 
"■iras/i  him  and  ■sancHfy  Jtiin  ivitli  the  Holy 
G/iosi';'^  ami  that  he  (the  cliiUi)  "may  be  deliv- 
ered from  GoiPs  lorafh.^^  Now,  does  not  all  this 
{)l;Hnly  prove  that  they  regard  tlie  CHILD  as  an 
o!>jeet  of  God's  wratli;  an;l  ihat  if  lie  were  to  die 
ia  that  state,  ho  v/ould  be  loisl?  Does  it  not  fur- 
ther prove  that  th.c  preacdiers  believe  the  child  in 
danger  of  snch  an  awfid  fate?  else  why  should 
they  pray  so  fervently  for  his  deliverance  from  it — 
that  is,  a  deliverance  from  a  fate  which  conld  not 
poH^hhj  befall  him?  In  odier  words,  why  should 
tiiey  pray  that  God  would  not  hold  the  child  un- 
der liis  v/ratli;  diat  lie  woe.ld  not  do  a  thing  which, 
themselves  bciisg  judges,  would  be  "palpably  im- 
j;ist,"  and.  wiiich  wovild  exhibit  him  as  a  "most 
merciless  tyrant:"  A  strange  ecrt  of  prayer, 
truly!  Ilow  evident,  therefore,  is  it,  tl>at  what- 
ever the  preachers  may  say,  their  own  Discipline 
incidcales  "  isifant  damnation!"  2.  A  second 
ground,  of  the  charge  against  Presbyterians,  cf 
teacidag  that  some  infants  dying  in  childhood  are 
lost,  is,  tliat  our  Confession  employs  the  phrase, 
"elect  infants,"  which  is  said  to  imply,  that  some 
who  die  in  childhood,  are  now  elect.  Not  to  re- 
peat what  has  been  often  said,  that  the  objected 
phrase  is  perfecdy  consistent  with  the  persuasion 
that  ciU  infants,  dvino;  in  infancy,  are  elected,  or 


rZ  THK    DIFFICILTIKS    Of 

saved  by  grace,  from  among  the  guilty  family  of 
mankind;  and  of  conrse,  that  they  will  not  be 
wanting,  when  the  Son  of  man  shall  "gather  to- 
gether his  elect  from  the  four  winds  of  heaven:" 
(Matth.  24  :  31.)  Not  to  urge  the  fact,  that  the 
Bible  no  where  expressly  affirms  the  salvation  of 
all  who  die  in  infancy,  and  is  still  farther  from 
teaching  that  any  of  them  are  lost,  (in  these  re- 
spects closely  followed  by  our  Confession,)  we 
rather  choose  to  turn  this  Arminian  battery  upon 
those  who  have  erected  it,  and  try  its  power  upon 
the  strong  holds  of  the  enemy.  The  Methodist 
Book  of  Discipline  employs  (Form  of  Baptism, 
p.  104)  a  phrase  of  precisely  the  same  character 
with  the  "elect  infants"  of  our  Confession,  the 
only  difference  being  the  use  of  the  word  "cAi'/rf- 
ren,''^  instead  of  infants.  "Grant,"  say  they, 
"that  this  child,  now  to  be  baptized,  may  ever  re- 
main in  the  number  of  thy  faithful  and  elect  child- 
ren.'' We  cannot  but  think  our  iMethodist  friends 
are  rather  unfortunate  in  selecting  the  weapons  of 
their  warfare.  Whatever  execution  their  artillery 
may  do  among  the  opposing  hosts,  it  is  equally 
destructive  in  its  recoil  upon  themselves.  A  few 
victories  won  after  this  fashion,  will  ruin  them 
for  ever. 

Thus  much  for  the  argumentinn  ad  homineni. 
We  are   accused   by  our  opponents  with  main- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  73 

taining  that  some  infants  are  for  ever  lost.  We 
think,  however,  that  on  the  principles  of  Arminian 
Methodism,  7io  infant  can  possibly  be  saved. 
What  is  salvation?  Does  it  not  imply  deliverance 
from  the  gnilt,  pollution,  and  just  punishment  of 
sin?  Are  not  infants  declared  (Meth.  Discip. 
p.  102)  to  be  "conceived  and  born  in  sin,"  and 
of  course,  under  its  guilt  and  pollution?  Are  not 
these  evils  unavoidable?  And  is  it  not  repeatedly 
affirmed  in  the  standard  writings  of  Methodism, 
•that  for  God  to  hold  his  creatures  responsible  for 
what  is  unavoidable,  would  be  "palpably  unjust," 
and  worthy  the  government  only  of  a  "merciless 
tyrant!"  What  then  are  infants  to  be  saved  from? 
From  an  act  of  "palpable  injustice"  on  the  part 
of  their  Judge?  From  the  grasp  of  a  "merciless 
tyrant?"  Most  manifestly,  therefore,  on  these 
principles  of  Methodism,  NO  INFANT  CAN 
BE  SAVED,  simply  because  no  infant  needs 
salvaiion!  With  respect  to  all  the  vast  multitude 
of  the  human  family  who  have  gone  down  to  the 
grave,  not  knowing  "their  right  hand  from  their 
left,"  Christ  ^'•has  died  in  vain.''''  Their  song 
will  not  be,  "Unto  Ilim  that  loved  us,  and  washed 
us  from  our  sins  in  his  own  blood" — for  they 
never  stood  in  need  of  "washing."  Their  song 
will  rather  be,  "Unto  Ilim  that  by  his  Provi- 
dence cut  short  our  davs,  and  SAVED  us  from 


•  I  inv.  Divvici'i.'vu'.r,  or 

ii\iii-^  in  '113  {)0:ly  nnill  b'j  corner,  we  bcc.inie  free, 
re-:^poiisi!)Ie,  .'in.riin,?;  f  mature?,  cxpo3Cil  to  n  fear- 
ful p.ccouritabiliiy  nt  his  jiulgment  bar,  nnd  liubio 
to  lio  (iov.-n  in  evevlasting  torment^!"' 

But  vvliat  gny  llio  Scriptures  upon  iho  subjrct 
wliicli  is  wrapped  up  in  so  many  contradiction:! 
nncl  iiicoaftistencics?  "  Oivr  first  parents  bein;:^ 
kTt  to  the  frGCclom  of  tlicir  own  will,  fell  from 
their  estnte-of  innoccncy."  "By  the  disobeJicnco 
of  onn,  many  were  made  sinners:"  '  Hom.  v.  "Tn 
A'.lani  all  die;"  beeanse  r.Il  have  hi  hhn  deserved 
to  (li;\  "By  tiie  ofTenco  of  c^ir?,  jndgTient  came 
r.pan  -all  men  to  rondemriation.*'  Adam  was  :\ 
pu!)lic  portion;  lie  acted  not  for  himself  alone,  but 
for  ills  posterity;  for  diem  he  was  to  stand  his  pro- 
bation, and  purchase  the  revv-ard  of  life  eternal;  or 
for  them  to  fail,  antl  entail  the  penalty  of  die  vio- 
lated lav,-:  "they  sinne  i  in  him  and  fell  with  him 
\n  his  first  transgression."*  As  a  part  of  tho 
threaten^'^d  penrdty,  "they  arc  shapen  in  iniquity, 
an.i  con.-  ?:i!i" — ''by  natnrc  chiKtron   of 

*    v/utsni-),  tho  great  ciiampion  of  nioclcrn  ^lethodism, 
HKikes  titc  rol]->\vin_q"  iinportiut  ii(bni-5:aoni:  "AJnm  is  to 
be  rcn-anlcci  ;vs  a  public  mm,  the  head  and  rcprcseutativo 
of  th«  huinm  race.":   Ag.ii'i:  "The  threat eninz}   ["•<■ 
nnuncod  upon  the  firr-t  pnir,  havo  all  respect  to  their  p 
toritv   n-j   v,-.,U  :<s   It  thcni.^clvc?."     Thcoi.  Inst.,  vol.  :?, 


AliJIIMAN    ::"]0TitODIfrvr.  lO 

wrath."*  '''rhoy  go  a^iniy  noni  the  Vvonil), 
speaking  lies."  Still  ihey  are  raorai  agents,  pos- 
sessing freedom  of  v/iil  in  the  liighest  sense;  lliey 
act  as  the,}'  clioosc  to  act,  are  under  no  pliysical 
constraint  or  coercion,  and  their  '-inclinaiion  to 
evil"  is  their  crime;  their  love  of  sin,  their  cou- 
demnation.j  Tlie  stronger  their  depraved  afi'i  c- 
tions,  the  more  intensely  they  burn  svitinn  llio 
corrupt  hcait,  so  mucli  more  vile  is  the  act,  so 
much  more  deep  and  deserved  tiie  righteous  retri- 
bution.    If,  in  the  Providence  of  God,  man  it> 

*  "Tlie  apostle  Paul  speaks  of  tlic  imputailon  of  Adam's 
sin,"  "and  dccl.ircs  that  by  one  man's  disobedience  many 
were  made,  constituted,  accounted,  and  deiilt  with  as  sin- 
nere,  and  treated  as  though  they  themselves  had  actually 
sivne.dy  "In  tiie  sense  above  given' wc  m.?}'  safely  con- 
tend for  the  i-oipututiou  of  Adam's  sin."  V/i^tsoii,  vol.  2, 
p.  216. 

t  "Creatures,"  says  Watson,  (vol.  2,  p.  A?^Q,  'S?.)"!Tioy 
hse  the.  power  to  Vvill  what  is  morally  good.'"  "The  in- 
ahlity^  liowever,  is  not  a  natural  but  a  moral  one."  "it  lias 
1  ec  n  contended,  that  as  the  evil  acts  done  by  thcni  are 
the  choice  of  their  corrupt  v/il!,  tlicy  are  tlicrcforc  done 
willingly,  and  are  in  consequence  ;'m«?.s.^a/>/i?,  &c.  This 
may  he  allowed  to  he  true  in  the  case  of  dttils.^^  The  rea- 
son wliy  it  is  true  in  the  case  oT  devils,  and  not  in  men, 
excepA  these  "who  have  formed  in  themselves  varioue 
habiis,^^  we  hn\e  already  shown  to  be  of  no  force,  because 
leading  to  the  absurd  conclusion,  that  a  n^san  v\'ho  hc;d  lost 
hi.s  iimbs  and  seniles,  and  even  his  reason,  would  still  l«s 
ibr  ever  bound  to  keep  the  perfect  law  of  God,  and  be  fcr 
ever  pi'vishahlc  in  hell  ibr  not  using  the  faculties  which 
lie  did  not  possess — simply  l»€cauKe  he  had  lost  them  hy 


76  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

unavoidably  a  fallen  creature,*  "prone  to  evil  as 
the  sparks  fly  upward" — if  he  has  become  so  by 
the  act  of  his  original  ancestor,  appointed  his  head 
and  representative,  let  him  not  repine.  Would  it 
have  been  either  more  wise,  or  tnoi^e  merciful,  to 
have  ordered  that  each  individual  should  enter  the 
world  in  the  infancy  of  his  being,  while  yet  his 
faculties  of  body  and  soul  were  in  the  imperfect 
and  undeveloped  state,  then,  to  stand  his  trial  for 
weal  or  woe ;  or  that  one  should  be  appointed, 
strong  and  vigorous,  in  all  the  perfection  of  that 
original  manhood,  which  the  all-wise  God  pro- 
nounced "very  good" — that  such  a  one  sjiould 
be  given  us,  in  whose  hands  should  be  placed  our 
destiny,  and  by  whose  conduct  should  be  decided 
the  future  character  of  his  posterity?  Could  every 
child  of  Adam  have  looked  on  when  the  scheme 
was  ordained  in  the  councils  of  eternity,  true 
modesty  would  have  dictated  the  right  answer  to 
these  inquiries.  And  had  the  result  been,  the 
establishment  of  the  whole  human  family  in  per- 
petual  holiness    and    happiness,    every    tongue 

*  "The  fact,"  says  Watson,  (vol.  2,  p.  58,)  "of  tliis  heing 
horn  liable  to  death,  a  part  of  tlie  jyenalty,  is  sufficient  to 
shovv  that  they  were  born  under  the  icliolc  malctUction.'''' 
This  is  sound  Calvinism,  but  sadly  at  war,  as  we  have 
seen,  with  other  parts  of  the  Arminian  scheme,  h  penalty, 
a  malediction  threatened,  and  in  part  executed,  against 
helpless  intants  who  were  uiiavoidabti/  born  in  sin  I  Pal- 
pable injusticel!    Merciless  tyrannylll 


AUMINIAN    METHODISM.  77 

would  have  celebrated  the  wisdom  and  benevo- 
lence of  the  ordination. 

In  conclusion  of  our  remarks  upon  the  subject 
of  Original  Sin,  and  in  strong  confirmation  of  the 
Calvinistic  view  which  has  just  been  given,  the 
following  extracts  from  Wesley's  Sermon  on 
"God's  love  to  fallen  man,"  merit  consideration 
from  the  source  whence  they  issue.  "Was  it  not 
easy  for  the  Almighty  to  have  prevented  it  (sin)?'* 
"It  was  undoubtedly  in  his  power  to  prevent  it; 
for  he  hath  all  power  both  in  heaven  and  in  earth. 
But  it  was  known  to  him  at  the  same  time,  that  it 
was  best  on  the  whole  not  to  prevent  itJ'^  "Un- 
less all  the  partakers  of  human  nature  had  re- 
ceived that  deadly  wound  in  Adam,  it  would  not 
have  been  needful  for  the  Son  of  God  to  take  our 
nature  upon  him."  "The  greatest  instance  of 
his  love  had  never  been  given,  if  Adam  had  not 
fallen."  "There  is  one  advantage  more:  Unless 
in  Adam  all  had  died,  being  in  the  loins  of  their 
first  parent,  every  descendant  of  Adam,  every 
child  of  man,  must  have  personally  answered  for 
himself  to  God:  It  seems  to  be  a  necessary  con- 
sequence of  this,  that  if  he  had  once  fallen^  once 
violated  any  command  of  God,  there  would  have 
been  no  possibility  of  his  rising  again;  there  was 
no  help;  but  he  must  have  perished  without  re- 
medy." "Who  would  not  rather  be  on  the 
7 


T8  THE    DIFFICULTIES    Of 

footing  lie  is  now?  Who  would  wish  to  hazard 
a  whole  eternity  upon  one  stake?"  "Where  then 
is  the  man  that  presumes  to  blame  God  for  not 
preventing  Adam's  sin?  Should  we  not  rather 
bless  him  from  the  ground  of  the  heart,  for  there- 
in laying  the  grand  scheme  of  man's  redemption!" 
Slc.  "None  ever  was  or  can  be  (ultimately)  a 
loser,  but  by  his  own  choice:"  Serm.,  vol.  2,  pp. 
235,  '40.  The  strong  sense  of  Wesley  occasion- 
ally bursts  his  Arminian  trammels,  though  gene- 
rally at  the  expense  of  his  consistency. 


ARMINIAN    METMODiaa.  7f 

LETTER    ill. 

Foreknowledge.     Predestinaiion . 

Rev.  Sir: 

Having  finished  the  discussion  of  one  of  those 
points  of  modern  Arminianism,  which,  as  we  have 
seen,  hangs  like  a  mill-stone  around  the  neck  of 
the  system,  we  come  now  to  another  topic  not 
less  fatal  in  its  hearings  and  results  upon  the 
theological  consistency  of  the  scheme;  a  topic, 
we  venture  to  affirm,  which  can  never  be  made  to 
harmonize  with  other  features  of  the  system,  and 
wliich,  for  the  sake  of  preserving  a  degree  of  ra- 
tional connexion  betv/een  its  parts,  ought  imme- 
diately to  be  repudiated  from  the  Arminian  creed. 
I  refer  to  that  mysterious  perfection  of  the  Divine 
nature,  by  which  known  unto  God  are  all  his 
works  from  the  bccrinnintr  of  the  world. 

II.  The  Difficulties  of  Methodism    in  con- 
nexion    WITH     THE     doctrine     OF     DiVINE 

Foreknowledge. 

The  Foreknowledge  of  God  seems  never  to 
have  been  a  favorite  in  the  body  of  divinity  cur- 
rent amoiig  Methodists.     Wesley  confounded  it 


80 


THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 


M'ith  Omniscience.  In  his  sermon  on  Predesti- 
nation he  says,  "If  we  spcah  properly^  there  is 
no  such  thing  as  Foreknowledge  or  After-know- 
ledge in  God" — and  one  of  his  modern  disciples 
adds  doubtfully,  »'If  v;e  may  apply  the  term 
Foreknowledge  to  the  Deity."  We  are  disposed, 
however,  to  think  that  Peter  spoke  quite  as  '■'•pro- 
7;er/7/"  as  either,  when  he  said  "with  the  eleven," 
"Him  being  delivered  by  the  determinate  counsel 
and  Foreknowledge  of  God,  ye  have  taken,  and 
with  wicked  hands  have  crucified  and  slain." 
And  again,  1  Pet.  1:2,  "Elect  according  to  the 
Foreknoudedge  of  God  the  Father,"  &c.  The 
founder  of  Methodism  had  sufficient  discernment 
to  perceive,  that  the  fact  of  the  Divine  mind  com- 
prehending all  lime  and  all  eternity  at  one  glance, 
and  as  present  in  one  view,  does  not  in  the  least 
relieve  the  difficulties  which  beset  the  fuI  ject  of 
Foreknowledge.  Hence  in  writing  to  Dr.  IJobcrt- 
son,  in  answer  to  the  inquiry,  "How  is  God's 
Foreknowledge  consistent  with  our  freedom?"  he 
candidly  replies,  ^^  J  cannot  tell.''''  (IMisc.  Works, 
vol.3,  p.  219.) 

This  concession  on  the  part  of  Wesley,  of  the 
impossibility  of  reconciling  the  infallible  Fore- 
knowledge of  Deity  with  human  liberty,  would 
not  deserve  particular  notice,  \vere  it  not  that  it  is  a 
eommon  contrivance  of  his  followers  to  decry  and 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  $1 

denounce  Calvinism  on  this  identical  ground.  "It 
is  impossible,"  they  say,  "to  reconcile  the  doc- 
trine of  decrees  with  man's  freedom;"  and  they 
are  exceedingly  abi.ndant  in  pointing  out  the 
dreadful  consequences  which  flow  from  this  al- 
leged fact,  and  in  showing  that  all  Presbyterians 
should  at  once  forsake  the  faith  of  their  fathers, 
and  come  over  to  the  Arminian  camp.  But  if  we 
were  to  admit  their  allegations  against  our  system 
to  be  true  to  the  full  extent,  yet  the  question  re- 
turns— "What  advantage  hath  the  Arminian?  or 
what  profit  is  there  in  jVIethodisin?"  Has  not 
your  "great  master  of  logic,"  as  you  call  him, 
declared  that  he  "cannot  telT'  how  your  own 
doctrine  of  Foreknowledge  can  be  reconciled 
with  our  freedom?  First  cast  out  this  beam  from 
your  own  eye,  and  then  shall  you  see  clearly  to 
extract  the  mote-  from  ours.  Honestly  show  us 
that  you  hold  and  teach  only  doctrines  which  can 
be  maintained  consistently  with  human  liberty, 
and  then  tue  will  believe  you  sincere,  when  you 
attempt  to  preach  down  Galvanism  as  destructive 
to  the  doctrine  of  man's  freedom  and  accounta- 
bility. 

It  is  not  at  all  surprising  that  Wesley,  with  all 
his  "logic,"  found  it  impossible  to  harmonize  his 
Arminian  notions  of  human  freedom  with  the 
Divine  Foreknowledge.     That  is  a  task  which 


82  TMK    DIFFICULTIES    QV 

no  man  nor  angel  will  ever  be  able  to  perform. 
President  Edwards  lias  sliown,*  with  a  force  of 
domonstralion  wbicli  \vc  believe  Ariiiinians  have 
never  altemplcd  to  meet,  that  their  notion  of  lib- 
erty is  "repugnant  to  itself,  and  sliuts  itself  wholly 
out  of  the  world;"  that  tlieir  notion  of  a  self  de- 
termining- power  by  which  tlie  .soul,  in  the  exer- 
cise of  a  power  of  v.illing,  or  choice,  determines 
acts  of  will,  supposes  the  gross  contradiction  of 
an  act  of  the  will  preceding  the  first  act  of  the 
luill,  and  directing  and  determining  it;  or  an  act 
before  the  tirst  act!  He  has  also  shown,  that  as 
every  free  act  must  be  performed  IN  a  state  of 
freedom,  the  Arminian  notion  tliat  freedom  of  tlie 
will  implies  i.idij/erence,  leads  to  the  gross  ab- 
surdity that  the  soul  chooses  one  thing  rather 
than  another,  at  the  very  time  that  it  has  no  pre- 
fcreiics  or  choice;  or  that  there  may  be  choice, 
while  there  is  no  chcioo. 

Edwaids  has  also  demonstrated,  that  the  idea 
of  con(ini(e}icc,  as  understood  by  Arminians  to 
belong  to  the  actions  of  men,  excludes  all  connec- 
tion between  cause  and  eifect,  (in  reference  to  this 
matter,)  and  supposes  many  events  to  take  place 
without  any  ground  or  reason  of  their  occurring, 
rather  than   their   not   occurring.     And  that  to 

*  .Inquiry  into  the  Freedom  of  the  Will.  Part  2, 
f?ec.  1. 


AllMINIAN    METHODISM.  63 

suppose  the  Divine  Being  to  have  infallible  Fore- 
knowledge of  the  volitions  of  men,  Avhile  there  is 
710  ground  or  reason  of  their  existence  rather 
tlian  their  non-existence,  is  to  suppose  him  to 
know  v/i'.hout  evidence,  or  to  know  a  thing  cei'- 
fidnli/,  vvliich  is  imcertain^  or  to  know  the  cer- 
tainty of  an  event,  while  at  the  same  time  he 
knows  its  uncertainty!  Truly,  it  is  not  wonder- 
ful tliat  Wesley  ^'coidd  not  telV  how  to  reconcile 
Foreknowledge  with  this  strange  mass  of  contra- 
dictions. 

Again:  "If  an  event  be  certainly  foreknown,  it 
must  have  a  certain  future  existence,  of  which 
certain  existence  there  must  be  some  reason  or 
ground.  For  as  every  free  agent  has  the  lii^erty 
of  acting  or  not,  or  of  pei-forming  a  different 
action  frcm  tlie  one  which  he  eventually  per- 
forms, if  tliere  existed  no  reason  why  the  one 
t  .ok  place  and  not  the  oilier,  all  knowledge  of 
tlie  action  before  it  occurs  is  necessarily  excluded. 
It  v\^ould  be  to  suppose  knowledge  without  the 
least  foundation  for  that  knowledge  in  the  object. 
God  cannot  know  that  something  exists,  where 
there  is  nothing.  God  cannot  see  that  an  effect, 
yet  future,  will  certainly  be  produced,  if  he  does 
not  know  any  cause  of  its  existence:"  (Bib.  Re- 
pertory, vgl.  3,  No.  2;  1831.)  If  it  be  alleged 
that  there  fs  no  other  ground  or  reason  of  the 


84  THE    DlFFICULTIEg    OF 

future  existence  of  tlie  event  necessary  to  be  sup- 
posed, in  order  to  infallible  Foreknowledge,  than 
the  free  agency  of  the  creature,  it  is  the  same  as 
to  say  that  it  is  infallibly  known  that  a  creature 
will  choose  or  prefer  one  course  of  action  before 
another,  because  he  is  at  liberty  to  choose  cither; 
or  in  other  words,  that  he  will  certainly,  in  a 
given  case,  choose  to  act  in  a  particular  manner, 
because  he  is  at  perfect  liberty  to  choose  to  act  in 
the  directly  opposite  manner,  which  is  absurd. 
If  there  be  such  a  thing  as  Arminian  liberty,  it  is 
obvious,  therefore,  that  there  can  be  no  such  at- 
tribute of  the  Divine  mind,  as  infallible  and  uni- 
versal Foreknowledge.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  we 
admit  with  the  Scriptures  the  doctrine  of  Fore- 
knowledge, it  destroys  forever  the  baseless  fabric 
of  Arminian  freedom. 

Thus  much  for  the  "great  raiister."  That  tho 
doctrine  of  the  Divine  prescience  is  not  in  very 
good  odor  among  the  disciples  of  ilie  same  school, 
is  inferrible  from  the  fact,  that  their  Articles  and 
Book  of  Discipline  are  entirely  silent  upon  the 
subject;  nor  is  it  any  where  noticed  in  a  volume 
of  near  200  pages,  professing  to  be  an  exhibition 
of  the  faith  of  Christians.  It  is  said  indeed  that 
the  book  mentions  the  Divine  wisdom,  which  in- 
cludes Foreknowledge;  but  if  men  who  "spake  as 
they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost*'  pjake  a 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  85 

distinction  between  these  perfections  of  God,  and 
give  to  each  its  separate  pbice  and  prominence  in 
their  system,  it  would  be  both  safe  and  motiest 
not  to  attempt  to  improve  upon  their  divinity. 

But  whatever  may  have  been  the  intention  of 
the  omission,  one  thing  is  certain — such  is  the 
headlong  zeal  with  which  the  advocates  of  Meth- 
odism pursue  llie  doctrine  of  Predestination,  that 
they  are  irresistibly  led  to  limit  and  even  to  deny 
this  essential  attribute.  Hence  the  celebrated 
Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  following  the  strange  concep- 
tion of  one,*  who  was  first  a  protectant,  then  a 
deist,  next  a  mystic,  and  finally  a  papist,  has  re- 
commended to  his  brethren  a  new  and  easy  doc- 
trine of  Foreknowledge.  Accordirsg  to  this  repre- 
sentation, the  Deity  makes  a  dislinction  in  the 
universe  oi  knoic-able  ih'ings,heiween  those  which 
he  will  foreknow,  and  those  of  which  lie  will 
choose  to  remain  ignorant.  Among  the  latter, 
Dr.  Clarke  places  the  free  actions  of  intelligent 
moral  agents.  God  resolves  not  to  forcknozv 
these.  Thus  it  seems,  that  ignorance  is  a  high 
perfection  of  an  infinite  Being,  without  which  it 
is  impossible,  according  to  the  Dr.,  to  govern  the 
moral  universe!  But  without  entering  into  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  merits  of  this  singular  opinion,  one 
thing  is  very  worthy  of  remark.  Dr.  Clarke  felt 
*  Chevalier  Ramsey. 


S8  THE  DiFFicii/nr.s   of 

that  llie  commonly  roccived  views  of  Foreknow- 
ledw-e  are  ineonsistent  with  the  denial  of  the  doc- 
trine  of  Predestination,  and  that  most  of  tlie  ob- 
jections made  to  the  latter,  lie  with  equal  weight 
aiicins  the  former.  Hen  e  the  necessity  of  de- 
vising some  mode  of  escaping  the  difficulties, 
M'hich  press  upon  the  admission  of  Foreknow- 
ledge wiih  the  rejection  of  Predestination.  In 
order  therefore  to  be  consistent,  he  has  become 
profane;  and  has  spoken  upon  this  subject  with 
even  greater  want  of  consideiation,  than  when  he 
attempted  to  prove  that  the  animal  vvhich  deceived 
Eve,  was  not  a  serpent,  but  an  ourang-outang,  or 
baboon! 

Dr.  W.  Fisk,  too,  wlicn  ho  comes  to  reply  to 
the  argument  in  favor  of  l^redestination,  drawn 
from  Foreknowledge,  very  clearly  evinces  that 
l]is  troubles  are  somewhat  distressing.  He  as- 
serts, (Disc,  on  Pred.,  p.  f),)  "that  in  the  moment 
God  ceases  to  know  all  that  is,  or  will  be,  or 
might  be,  under  any  possible  contingency,  he 
ceases  to  be  God;"  and  he  admits  that  "whatever 
God  foreknows  will  undoubtedly  (or  certainly) 
come  to  pass;"  "but  the  simple  question,  he  tells 
us,  (p.  6,)  is,  does  God  know  an  event  becaitse  it 
is  cerlain;  or  docs  his  knowing  it  to  be  certain, 
make  it  certain?"  But  suppose  we  admit  that 
Foreknowledge  rather  proves  than  causes  future 


ARMINIAN'    METHODISM.  S7 

certainty;  and  suppose  we  agree  with  Dr.  F.,  that 
God  knows  an  event,  because  it  is  certain — we 
shouki  be  glad  to  be  informed,  liov/  it  will  help 
the  Dr.  out  of  his  difficulties  to  say,  that  the  ac- 
tions of  men,  good  and  bad,  are  fixed  in  infallible 
certainty,  and  are  therefore  foreknown?  If  Dr. 
Fisk  admit  the  fixed  infallible  certainty  of  man's 
moral  conduct,  he  is  a  predestinarian  of  no  mean 
stamp;  and  whether  he  choose  to  ascribe  this  in- 
fallible certainty  of  future  actions  to  Foreknow- 
ledge or  to  fate,  does  not  ap})ear  to  be  a  matter  of 
much  consequence  to  the  argument  on  one  side 
or  the  other.* 

Besides,  as  the  divine  Foreknowledge  is  eternal 
as  the  being  of  God,  if  He  foreknew  the  conduct 
of  men,  ^'because  it  icas  certain,^^  then  must  all 
the  evil  actions  of  men  have  been  fixed  from  eter- 
nity, in  infallible  certainty.  Will  Dr.  Fisk  in- 
form us,  by  ivhom,  or  by  what,  they  were  thus 
eternally  and  infallibly  fixed?  Not  by  the  crea- 
tures,   unless    they    too   were    eternal.     These 

*  "If  it  be  alleged  that  the  purpose  influences  the  ac- 
tion, and  therefore  there  is  a  wide  difference,  we  answer, 
that  if  the  Divine  purpose — as  ice  maintain — has  no  other 
influence  on  the  action  than  to  render  it  certain^  there  is 
DO  difterence  at  all,  in  this  respect,  between  the  theories 
of  Foreknowledge  and  deci'ee;  for  on  some  account  and 
for  some  reason,  the  thing  is  as  certain  as  it  can  be  on 
the  theory  of  mere  Foreknowledge."  Biblical  Repertorj, 
Vol.  3,  No.  2. 


88  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

^vicked  actions  could  not  fix  themselves;  and  Dr. 
F.  assures  us,  (p.  5,)  that  "Foreknowledge  can- 
not, in  the  nature  of  things,  have  the  least  possi- 
ble influence  in  making  an  event  certain."  To 
say  that  human  liberty  lays  any  ground  for  this 
fixed  infallible  certainty,  we  have  already  seen, 
is  extremely  absurd. 

A  simple  statement  of  undeniable  truth,  will 
place  this  subject  in  its  proper  light.  The  moral 
actions  of  men  are  foreknown  of  God,  hundreds 
of  years  before  they  take  place.  This  no  one 
can  doubt  who  believes  the  prophecies  of  the 
Scriptures.  The  conduct  of  men,  whether  good 
or  evil,  is  therefore  infallibly  foreknown,  unless 
the  knowledge  of  God  be  mere  conjecture.  It  is 
just  as  certain,  therefore,  that  it  will  agree  with 
the  Divine  Foreknowledge,  and  be  precisely  what 
it  is  known  to  be,  as  it  is  certain  God  will  not  and 
cannot  mistake.  Here  then  is  a  certainty  as  fixed 
and  infallible  as  any  that  grows  out  of  Predesti- 
nation. If  we  reject  one  of  these,  on  this  ac- 
count, we  must,  to  be  consistent,  reject  both. 
But  to  deny  the  Divine  prescience,  is  to  deny 
God.  Thus  does  Methodism,  in  her  rash  haste, 
direct  her  course  upon  the  very  brink  of  the  dark 
abyss  ©f  Atheism. 

But  what  is  Predestination?  It  is  the  doctrine 
of  a   plaa   devised  and  executed  by  a  God  of 


ARMiNlAN    METHODISM.  89 

infinite  wisdom,  goodness,  and  truth,  in  this 
plan  man  occupies  the  place  of  a  free  moral  agent, 
to  wiiom  the  divine  decree  secures  freedom  of 
action  in  its  highest  sense.  God  has  ordained 
that  he  shall  be  possessed  of  liberty,  and  it  must 
be  so.*  But  man,  created  free  either  to  stand  or 
fall,  abused  his  liberty  by  rebelling  against  God, 
and  lost  all  that  renders  existence  valuable — his 
moral  purity,  and  his  hope  of  immortality.  To 
rescue  him  from  this  condition  of  hopeless  misery, 
God  has  provided  a  Savior,  who  is  the  "author 
and  finisher  of  the  faitli"  that  saves  the  soul. 
Every  thing  that  a  merciful  God  performs  for 
man's  redemption,  he  before  determined  (or  de- 
creed) to  do.  He  becomes  "the  author  and  fin- 
isher of  faith"  and  salvation  to  those  who  are  de- 
livered from  hell.  He  before  decreed  or  deter- 
mined to  become  the  "author  and  finisher"  of 
their  redemption.    This  is  the  doctrine  of  election 

*  "Could  not  God  from  all  eternity  decree  that  creatures 
endued  with  lihcrty  should  exist;  and  if  this  was  his  pur- 
pose, will  not  the  event  answer  to  it?  Human  liberty, 
thereiore,  instead  of  being  destroyed  by  the  decree,  is 
establisl}ed  upon  an  immutable  basis.  It  would  be  very 
strange  indeed,  if  the  Almighty  could  not  effectually  will 
the  existence  of  a  free  voluntary  act.  To  suppose  the 
contrary,  would  be  to  deny  his  oninipotence.  To  say  then 
that  the  decree  by  which  the  certainty  of  a  free  act  is 
secured,  violates  free  agency,  seems  very  much  like  a 
contradiction."  Bib.  Rep. 
8 


90  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

to  eternal  life.  But  when  ditl  God  first  intend 
to  perform  these  acts  of  mercy  for  fallen  men? 
Was  there  ever  a  period  when  He  did  not  intend 
to  redeem  them?  Manifestly  not.  This  eternal 
design^  then,  or  intention,  to  deliver  immortal 
souls  from  death,  by  becoming  (through  Christ) 
the  "author  and  finisher  of  their  faith,"  holines;', 
and  salvation,  is  the  eternal  decree  of  predestina- 
tion to  a  life  of  endless  bliss. 

On  the  other  hand,  if  fallen  man  live  and  die 
impenitent,  he  fills  up  the  measure  of  his  iniquity, 
and  in  the  strong  language  of  our  Confession,  is 
♦'doomed  to  dishonor  and  wrath  for  his  sin*^ — 
chap.  3,  sect.  7.  It  is  right  in  the  God  of  justice 
to  doom  him.  It  was  also  right  to  ordain  or  de- 
termine to  doom  him  to  wrath  ^^ for  his  sm."  It 
cannot  be  wrong  to  ordain  or  determine  to  do  a 
right  thing.  Every  thing  which  is  done  by  the 
righteous  Rector  of  the  universe,  He  before  de- 
termined to  do.  He  actually  sentences  the  sinner 
to  sufferybr  his  sin.  He  before  decreed,  ordain- 
ed, or  determined  to  do  so.  And  this  is  the  vili- 
fied and  misrepresented  doctrine  of  reprobation 
to  eternal  death. 

But  what  is  the  doctrine  of  foreknowledge  upon 
the  same  subject?  God  creates  man,  and  places 
him  in  a  state  where  he  infallibly  foreknows  he 
will  be  led  by  temptation  to  commit  sin.     Under 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  91 

thesf  circumstances  man  will  sin  as  certainly  and 
undoubtedly  as  it  is  certain  the  all-knowing  God 
cannot  mistake.  Man  is  therefore  created  with 
an  infallible  certainty  of  sinning  against  God.  His 
righteous  retribution  is  also  infallibly  foreknown. 
Man  will  infallibly  sin,  and  God  will  infallibly 
doom  him  to  wrath  for  his  sin.  All  this,  in  the 
case  of  every  finally  impenitent  sinner,  was  as 
certainly  foreknown  before  his  creation,  as  it  is  an 
awful  fact  after  his  doom  is  sealed,  or  as  it  will  be 
known  at  the  final  consummation. 

The  sin  and  its  punishment  would  as  certainly 
not  be  different  from  what  they  prove  to  be,  as  it 
is  impossible  God  should  become  an  erring,  de- 
ceived Being.  How  then  are  the  difficulties  di- 
minished in  the  latter  statement  of  the  subject? 
In  predestination,  the  existence  of  sin  is  permit- 
ted, as  the  abuse  of  man's  free  agency.  In  fore- 
knowledge, it  is  foreseen,  and  not  prevented.  In 
the  former,  it  has  a  place  in  the  universe,  as  a 
mysterious  evil,  out  of  which  God  will  bring  ulti- 
mate good.  In  the  latter,  it  is  distinctly  and  in- 
fallibly foreknown,  and  will  hold  a  place  in  the 
creation  as  certainly  as  God  is  unerring.  In  pre- 
destination, God  decrees  or  determines  to  permit 
sin,  and  to  punish  the  wickedybr  their  sin.  He 
determines  to  do  the  very  thing,  which  all  ac- 
knowledge it  is  right  he  should  do.     In  fore- 


92  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

knowledge,  lie  foresees  innillihly  tlie  sin  of  tho 
creature,  nnd  also  liis  own  act  by  which  he  will 
doom  him  to  everlasting  destniction;  and  yet  with 
this  infallible  certainty  of  man's  sin  and  perdition, 
creates  him  v/ith  precisely  those  faculties  and  pro- 
pensities, and  places  him  in  that  state  and  under 
those  circumstances,  in  connection  widi  which 
his  fall  and  ruin  will  as  certainly  be  the  conse- 
quence as  God  is  certainly  omniscient.  We  sub- 
mit to  the  candid  judgment  of  every  reader,  whe- 
ther those  M'ho  reject  predestination,  while  they 
receive  the  doctrine  of  foreknowledge,  do  not 
"strain  at  a  gnat,  and  swallow  a  camel."  Nor 
need  it  be  thought  strange  to  hear  even  preachers 
of  this  stamp,  utler  sentiments  widi  regard  to  the 
latter,  which  wound  the  feelings  and  even  chill 
the  blood  of  sober  Ciiristians. 

It  is  foreign  to  the  design  of  these  loiters,  to 
write  a  lai}ored  treatise  upon  prodostination;  yet 
as  this  feature  of  Calvinism,  more  than  all  others, 
has  furnislicd  modern  Methodists  with  matter  of 
abuse  and  denunciation,  it  may  be  proper  to  dwell 
briefly  upon  its  logical  bearings  upon  several  dis- 
tinct topics;  in  doing  which  we  shall  cn;]rnvor  at 
the  same  time  to  exhibit  the  weakness  of  ihe  Ar- 
minian  scheme. 

1.  The  inquiry,  Why  does  sin  exist  under  the 
government  of  a  most  wise,  Jioly,  and  powerful 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  9$ 

Ruler?  has  generally  been  regarded  as  somewhat 
difficult,  (^alvinists,  from  the  days  of  the  apostle 
Paul,  and  of  Augustine,  down  to  the  times  of 
Luther,  Calvin,  and  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
have  uniformly  answered,  ♦'Because  God  saw 
proper  to  permit  its  existence,  determining  so  to 
overrule  all  things  as  to  make  'the  M^rath  of  man 
to  praise  him,'  and  from  infinite  evil  to  bring  in- 
finite good."  If  any  one  shall  question  whether 
this  has  been  the  uniform  belief  of  Calvinists,  we 
can  only  pity  his  want  of  information,  and  send 
him  to  tlic  authors  themselves,  before  he  attemptt 
to  discuss  the  subject.  Thus  the  Westminster 
Confession:  "This  their  sin  (viz.  of  our  first  pa- 
rents) God  was  pleased  according  to  hia  wise  and 
holy  counsel,  to  permit,  having  purposed  to  or- 
der it  to  his  own  glory:"  chap.  6,  sect.  1.  Again: 
Larger  Catechism,  Q.  19 — "God  by  his  Provi- 
dence permitted  some  of  the  angels  wilfully  and 
irrecoverably  to  fall  into  sin  and  damnation,  limit- 
ing and  ordering  that  and  all  their  sins  to  his  own 
glory."  While,  therefore,  the  Westminster  di- 
vines maintain  that  "God  hath  foreordained  what- 
:foever  comes  to  pass,"  they  also  admit  the  im- 
portant distinction  between  the  efficient  and  the 
permissive  decrees  of  God,  so  that  "all  things 
fall  out  according  to  the  nature  of  second  causes:'* 
(chap.  5,  sect.  2.)  "Neither  is  God  the  author 
S* 


Si  tut:  DirnciLTiE?  or 

of  sin;  nor  is  violence  offered  to  tlic  will  of  tlift 
creatures;  nor  is  the  liberty  or  contingency  of 
second  causes  taken  away,  but  rather  establislied:'* 
(chap.  3,  sect.  1.)  This  powerful,  wise,  and 
good  Providence,  it  is  farther  said,  (ch.  5,  sec.  4,) 
"extendeth  itself  even  to  the  first  fall  and  all  other 
sins  of  angels  and  men,  and  that  ?wl  by  a  hare 
permission,  but  such  (permission)  as  hath  joined 
with  it  a  most  wise  and  powerful  bounding-,  an;l 
otherwise  ordering  and  governing  them,  in  a  mani- 
fold dispensation,  to  liis  own  holy  ends;  yet  SO 
AS  the  sinfulness  thereof  proceedeth  only  from 
the  creature  and  not  from  God,  who  being  most 
holy  and  righteous,  neither  is  nor  can  he  the  au- 
thor or  approver  of  sin."  "Not  by  a  baj^e  per- 
mission;" "not,"  to  employ  the  illustration  v( 
Calvin,  "as  though  God  were  seated  in  a  watch- 
tower,  awaiting  fortuitous  events."  The  views 
of  the  \Vestminster  Confession  arc  in  part  well 
expressed  b}-  Wesley,  as  before  quoted:  "It  v.-as 
easy  for  the  Almighty  to  have  prevented  sin." 
"It  was  undoubtedly  in  his  power  to  prevv-^nt  it; 
for  lie  hath  all  power  both  in  heaven  and  in  earth. 
But  it  was  known  to  him  at  the  same  time,  tluU 
it  was  best  on  the  whole  not  to  prevent  it."  Serm. 
vol.  2,  p.  235.  That  sin,  therefore,  which  lie 
saw  "on  the  wlicie  to  be  bcsl^'^  he  determined, 
decreed,  or  foreordained — not  "to  'mfivcTtcc  iiicti 


ARMINTAX    METIIOPISM.  95 

to  commlC — not  '*lo  ivorh  in  the  hearts  of  fhe 
ivkked''^ — (as  v/e  are  slanderously  reported) — but 
TO  PERiMIT*  an  I  to  order  or  overrule  for  his 
own  glory. 

Ths  Calviiiistic  answer  to  the  inquiry,  Why 
does  sin  exist?  may  therefore  be  summed  up  as 
follows.  I.  Sin  exists  by  ihc  permission  of  the 
Almighty  Ivuler.  2.  It  exists  according  to  his 
intention.  If  Tie  sufier  or  permit  siii  to  exist,  he 
douhtle5!S  intended  to  do  so.  Otherwise  he  per- 
milted  it  iviihovJ  intention;  that  is,  without  de- 
sign, plon,  or  vs'isdoni;  or  contrary  to  his  inten- 
tioii.  In  other  words,  contrary  to  what  is  hGly, 
wise,  and  good,  as  all  his  designs  must  be.    . 

3.  The  permitted  existence  of  sin,  as  a  part  of 
the  divine  plan,  was  infallibly  certain  and  fixed 
l;cfore  the  creation  of  angels  or  men;  or  in  other 
v.x>rds,  from  eternity.  For  if  it  be  according  to 
Xhe  intention  of  the  Divine  Being  to  sujfer  the 
existence  of  sin,  it  was  always  so,  unless  God 
has  changed.  Further:  God  from  all  eternity 
foreknew  that  ho  would  suffer  sin  to  exist.     But 

*  It  is  singular  that  a  Doctor  of  Divinity  should  so  far 
misunderstand  the  theologicul  meaning  of  this  tern"!,  as  to 
talk  as  followp:  "If  they  mean  by  permission,  that  God 
g-avc  a  personal  permit  to  Adam  and  Eve  to  commit  sin," 
«fec.  ^'To  say  that  God  gave  a  permit  or  license  to  sin,  is 
bold ;  but  to  say  that  he  docrccd  it,"  &c.  Dr.  Bangs' 
Reply  to  Hasksl,  p.  ^'2. 


96  TIIK    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

if  from  eternity  he  certainly  knew  thai  he  would 
permit  sin,  lie  must  have  certainly  determined  or 
purposed  to  permit  it.  Otherwise  he  could  not 
certainly  know  that  he  would  do  that  which  he 
had  not  certainly  determined  to  do.  Besides,  if 
the  purpose  to  permit  sin  be  not  from  eternity, 
then  must  it  have  been  formed  at  some  subse- 
quent period.  Then  there  must  have  been  some 
reasons  suggested  to  the  Divine  mind,  why  He 
should  form  it  at  tliat  time  and  not  before.  But 
this  supposes  new  knowledge  to  be  imparted  to 
the  Deity,  which  is  absurd. 

4.  "Could  not  God  have  placed  at  the  head  of 
the  human  family,  on  whom  the  destiny  of  the 
rest  should  depend,  one  who  would  not  have  sin- 
ned? If  he  could  not,  then  it  follows  that  sin 
could  not  be  avoided,  if  man  existed;  and  the  de- 
termination to  create  man,  involved  in  it  a  purpose 
\o  permit  tlie  existence  of  sin.  But  if  it  be  said, 
God  could  have  created  in  the  place  of  Adam,  one 
who  would  not  have  sinned,  but  still  chose  to 
create  one  who  he  knew  would  sin,  it  is  as  evi- 
dent as  any  thing  can  be,  that  by  this  selection  he 
did  determine  to  permit  sin."*  So  that  whether 
we  suppose  God  could  or  could  not  have  created 
as  the  federal  head  of  the  race,  a  man  who  would 
not  have  sinned,  we  are  landed  in  the  doctrine  of 
*  For  this  extract,  see  Bib.  Kep.,  vol.  3,  p.  174. 


ARMIXIAN    METHODISM.  97 

tiio  Divine  permission  of  sin:  much  more,  if  we 
admit,  (which  is  the  common  Calvinistic  belief,) 
that  the  same  power  wliich  has  preserved  in  pu- 
rity and  fidelity  legions  of  angels,  and  will  forever 
preserve  "the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect," 
could  also  ^'witli  the  temptation,  have  made  a 
7cay  of  escape''^  for  our  first  parents;  to  deny 
which,  seems  very  like  denying  both  the  power 
and  the  truth  of  God. 

Very  different,  however,  is  the  answer  of  the 
modern  Methodist  to  the  inquiry,  "Why  does  sin 
exist?"  lie  maintains,  that  on  the  supposition  of 
man's  U'gg  agency,  tlie  Almighty  coidd  not  pre- 
vent his  fall;  and  that  after  doing  all  in  Ids  power 
to  "secure  the  accomplishment  of  his  will,"  lie 
was  utterly  defeated  in  his  plan!  Hear  the  dis- 
tinguished Dr.  Bangs:  "To  sny  that  the  power  of 
God  was  adequate  to  have  prevented  man  as  a 
free  agent,  from  sinning,  is  a  contradiction." 
(Reply  to  Haskel,  p,  24.)  And  "Watson,  whose 
book  is  published  by  the  IMcth.  Book  concern — 
"We  may  confidently  say  that  He  willed  tlie 
contrary  of  Adam's  ofk^nce,  and  that  he  used 
kJAt  MEAlNS  consistent  with  his  determination 
to  give  and  maintain  free  agency  to  his  creatures, 
to  SECURE  the  (tccomplishment  of  his  tciU.''^* 

*  And  ynt  Wntson  naJ  before  i-emarked — "The  obser- 
vations of  Doddridge  have  a  cnmincndahle  mode -ty^  Viz.: 


98  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OP 

What  a  picture  is  this  of  the  Almighty  Sovereign, 
and  of  the  government  whose  hehn  he  holds  in 
his  hand!  '"My  counsel  shall  stand,  and  I  will 
do  all  my  pleasure."  (Isaiah  46 :10.)  *'Not  so,'* 
replies  the  Methodist;  "God  often  fails  to  secure 
the  accomplishment  of  his  will  and  pleasure,  and 
that  too  after  using  all  means  consistent  with  the 
nature  of  the  object  he  was  striving  to  secure  V^ 
*'He  doeth  according  to  his  will  in  the  army  of 
heaven  and  among  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth.'''' 
(Dan.  4:35.)  "However  it  may  be  in  heaven!'^ 
answers  Watson,  "He  is  often  greatly  disap- 
pointed of  'his  will'  among  the  'inhabitants  of  the 
earth!'"  "We  have  obtained  an  inheritance," 
saith  the  apostle,  '•'hem^  predestinated  according 
to  the  purpose  of  Him,  who  worketh  all  things 
after  the  counsel  of  his  own  will.''^  (Eph.  1:11.) 
"To  that  statement,"  replies  the  Arminian,  "I 
have  several  olojections.  1.  'Froperh/  spcakingy* 
God  does  not  'ivork  all  things'  at  all.  I  would 
almost  as  soon  believe  the  Presbyterian  Confes- 
sion of  Faith,  as  to  believe  that.  2.  All  things 
are  not  'after  the  counsel  of  his  own  will.'  For 
we  may  ^confidently  say,''  that  He  used  all  pro- 
fit will  be  demanded,  Why  was  moral  evil  permitted? 
Why  did  not  God  prevent  the  abuse  of  liberty?'  One 
would  not  willingly  say  that  he  was  NOT  ABLE,  with- 
out  violating  the  nature  of  liis  creatures;  nor  is  it  possible 
to  PROVE   THIS."    Vol.  1,  p.  435. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  99 

per  means  to  secure  the  accompli  slim  ent  of  his 
will,  in  the  case  of  our  first  parents,  and  most 
signally  FAILED!  3.  My  third  objection  is, 
that  if  we  have  no  better  foundation  for  our  hope 
of  the  eternal  Hiiheritance,''  than  'the  ptfrpose  of 
Him  who  worketh  all  things  after  the  counsel  of 
his  OWN  "WILL,'  why  we  may  as  well  strike 
our  colors,  and  turn  Calvinists  at  once!"  "Lord," 
says  the  Psalmist,  "INCLINE  not  my  lieart  to 
any  evil  thing,  to  practise  wicked  works."  (Psl. 
141:  4.)  "I  object  utterly,"  says  the  Arminian, 
"to  any  such  absurd  Calvinistic  prayer!  What! 
a  Christian  pray  that  God  would  not  incline  his 
heart  to  evil,  nor  lead  him  into  temptation,  when 
it  is  as  plain  as  our  best  writers  can  make  it,  that 
God  could  not  incline  the  hearts  of  our  first  pa- 
rents even  to  good,  without  destroying  their  free 
agency!"  '•^Incline  my  heart  unto  thy  testimo- 
nies and  not  to  covetousness,"  repeats  the  Psalm- 
ist. (Psl.  119:  36.)  "Shocking!"  exclaims  Wes- 
ley. "Why  does  not  the  Bible  ^speak  more 
properly P  " 

"Will  they  deny,"  remarks  Edwards,  "that  an 
omnipotent  and  infinitely  wise  God  could  possibly 
invent  and  set  before  men  such  strong  motives  to 
be  obedient,  and  have  kept  them  before  them  in 
such  a  manner  as  should  have  influenced  all  man- 
kind to  continue  in  their  obedience,  as  the  'elect 


100  THE    DIFFICLLTIES    OF 

angcly'  have  done,  M'illiout  destroying  their  lib- 
erty? God  does  not  will  sin,  as  sin."  "If  it  is 
not  in  the  power  of  God  to  keep  a  free  agent  from 
sinning,  with  what  propriety  can  he  be  directed 
to  pray  for  restraining  grace,  or  that  he  may  be 
kept  from  sin?  If  it  is  not  in  the  power  of  God 
to  control  the  hearts  of  free  agents,  and  restrain 
them  from  sin,  according  to  his  pleasure,  dreadful 
consequences  may  ensue.  They  might  in  every 
respect  cross  the  will  of  God,  and  defeat  every 
valuable  end  the  Divine  Being  proposed  in  their 
formation.  The  good  he  aimed  at  in  creation 
may  be  prevented,  irreparable  disorders  be  intro- 
duced. The  friends  of  virtue  would  be  filled 
with  lamentation,  and  the  enemies  of  God  and  of 
all  good,  would  triumph  and  exult.  We  infer 
that  as  God  is  able  to  restrain  sin  among  the 
apostate  children  of  men,  who  are  under  the  do- 
minion of  powerful  vicious  habits,  so  we  can 
much  more  easily  conceive  that  he  was  able  to 
have  prevented  sin  in  beings  made  origimilly 
lioly."  (Day's  Sermon.)  From  all  which  it  is 
plain,  that  the  problem  of  the  existence  of  sin  in 
the  world,  must  be  solved  by  saying  with  AVes- 
ley,  that  while  "it  was  easy  for  the  Almighty  to 
have  prevented  sin,  he  saw  that  it  was  best  on  the 
whole    not  to   prevent  it:"    In  other  words,  to 


ARMINIAN   METHODISM.  101 

permit  its  entrance,  and  overrule  its  event  to  his 
own  glory.* 

X.  The  existence  of  sin  in  our  world,  whether 
we  know  the  manner  of  its  occurrence  or  not,  is  a 
lamentable  FACT;  and  its  baneful  influence  is 
felt  among  all  classes  of  the  human  family.  "All 
have  sinned  and  come  short  of  the  glory  of  God." 
*'Death  has  passed  upon  all  men,  for  that  all  have 
sinned."  All  that  die,  die  because  they  are 
guilty,  and  therefore  worthy  of  death,  the  wages 
of  sin;  and  all  are  shapen  in  iniquity,  and  in  sin 
are  they  conceived. 

Now,  if  we  suppose  that  it  had  been  the  "good 
pleasure"  of  God  to  leave  them  all  to  the  just  re- 
ward or  "wages"  of  their  sin;  if,  as  in  the  case 
of  the  angels  that  kept  not  their  first  estate,  he 
had  entertained  thoughts  of  mercy  toward  none 
of  them;  would  it  have  been  right  or  wrong,  just 

*  To  talk  of  the  Divine  Being-  permitting  an  event  to 
take  place,  which  he  is  not  able  to  prevent,  is  about  as 
wise  as  to  talk  of  a  man  permitting  the  sun  to  rise,  or 
the  wind  to  blow  where  it  listeth.  And  yet  it  is  remark- 
able that  Watson  seems  to  adopt  this  sentiment.  "It  is 
obvious,"  he  says,  "that  by  nothing-  can  we  fairly  avoid 
this  consequence,  (of  making  God  the  author  of  sin,)  but 
by  allowing  the  distinction  between  determinations  TO 
DO  on  the  part  of  God,  and  determinations  TO  PER- 
MIT certain  things  to  be  done  by  others."  Vol.  2,  p.  424. 
Again:  "A  decree  to  permit,  involves  no  such  conse- 
quences." Yet  he  holds  that  God  could  not  pevent  sin 
ia  free  agents! 

9 


i02  THE    DIFFICULTIES    Of 

or  unjust?  If  you  say  it  would  have  been  wrong  or 
unjust,  to  execute  the  penalty  of  the  violated  law 
upon  the  whole  family  of  man,  then  it  follows 
that  in  respect  to  that  part  of  mankind  toward 
whom  the  punishment  would  have  been  unjust, 
*'Christ  has  died  in  vain,"  grace  has  no  meaning 
nor  application,  unless  it  be  grace  to  save  those 
whom  it  would  have  been  imjiist  to  punish,  and 
who  therefore  stood  in  need  of  no  salvation.  If, 
therefore,  as  the  Arminian  vehemently  argues, 
Christ  has  died  for  all,  and  his  atonement  is  a 
*'free  gift" — GRACE  in  its  highest  sense — then 
it  inevitably  follows  that  all  might  justly  have 
been  left  to  perish  for  their  sin,  if  such  had  been 
the  good  pleasure  of  God. 

Now  let  us  vary  the  case  a  little.  Instead  of 
supposing  all  to  receive  just  punishment  for  their 
sin — instead  of  the  Divine  Being  determining  that 
all  should  in  mass  experience  their  just  deserts- 
He  resolves,  in  a  most  wise  and  wonderful  man- 
ner, to  rescue  from  the  jaws  of  death  a  very  large 
number  of  these  righteously  condemned  rebels,  to 
stand  as  everlasting  monuments  of  his  conde- 
scending love  and  mercy — while,  to  illustrate  for 
ever  his  hatred  of  sin,  he  permits  the  law  to  take 
its  course,  and  executes  its  sentence  upon  the 
rest — would  it  ever  enter  the  mind  of  any  intelli- 
gent person,  to  complain  that  God  was  "partial," 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  103 

because  that  when  they  were  all  deserving  only 
of  his  wrath,  and  undeserving  of  his  mercj^,  he 
executed  his  wrath  upon  only  a  part,  and  most 
graciously  pardons  and  admits  to  his  favor,  the 
rest  of  the  guilty  rebels?  Had  he  punished  the 
whole,  all  ground  of  complaint  would  have  been 
removed;  there  would  be  no  injustice  or  caprice; 
but  since  he  has  seen  proper  to  punish  only  a 
part,  he  is  charged  Vvith  partiality!  "In  matters 
of  grace,"  says  Watson,  "no  axiom  can  be  more 
clear,  than  that  he  who  gratuitously  bestows,  has 
the  right  to  do  what  he  will  with  his  own.'* 
(Vol.  2,  p.  443.)  "Friei-id,  I  do  thee  no  wrong. 
Is  thine  eye  evil,  because  I  am  good?"  (Matth. 
20:15.)  These  plain  principles  of  common  sense 
are  so  universally  admitted,  as  to  have  been  re- 
cognized in  the  practical  administration  of  all 
good  governments;  and  indeed,  are  universally 
acknowledged  in  all  the  ordinary  walks  of  life. 

Who  then  maketh  the  Christian  to  differ  from 
his  former  self,  and  from  his  impenitent  neigh- 
bors? And  what  has  he  that  he  did  not  receive? 
The  answer  is,  "We  are  his  WORKMAN- 
SHIP, created  in  Christ  Jesus  unto  good  works." 
"You  hath  he  quickened^  {or  made  spiritually 
alive,)  who  were  DEAD  in  trespasses  and  sins." 
"It  is  God  that  worketh  in  you  both  TO  WILL 
and  TO    DO   of  his   good   pleasure."      "Thy 


104  THE  diff:culties  of 

people   shall   be    willing   in    the    day   of  THY 
rOWER." 

But  was  there  not  something^  good  found  in  the 
creature,  something  of  the  nature  of  holiness,  or 
moral  excellence,  to  move  or  induce  God  to  per- 
form the  work  of  spiritual  quickening,  or  restora- 
tion to  spiritual  life?  The  answer  is,  "He  hath 
chosen  (or  elected)  us  in  him  (Christ)  before  the 
foundation  of  the  ivorld,  (not  because  he  foresaw 
any  thing  good  or  holy  in  us,  but)  that  ice  should 
be  holy  and  without  blame  before  him  in  love." 
"In  whom  also  we  have  obtained  an  inheritance, 
being  PREDESTIiVATED  according  to  the 
PURPOSE  of  Him  who  worketh  all  things  after 
the  COUNSEL  of  his  own  will."  "Who  hath 
saved  and  called  us  with  an  holy  calling,  not  ac- 
cording to  our  works,  but  according  to  his  own 
PURPOSE  and  grace,  which  was  given  us  in 
Christ  Jesus  before  the  icorld  began/''  To  these 
very  individuals  did  the  blessed  Savior  refer  when 
he  said,  "All  that  the  Father  GIVETH  me  shall 
come  unto  me^  "Tliou  hast  given  him  power 
over  all  flesh,  that  he  should  give  eferncd  life  to 
as  many  as  thou  hast  GIVEN  ///??-<."  Again: 
"I  pray  for  them:  I  pray  not  for  the  world,  but 
for  them  whom  thou  hast  GIVEN  me."  "No 
man  can  come  unto  me  except  it  were  GIVEN 
unto  him  of  my  Father."     "My  sheep  liear  my 


AHMIMAN    METHODISM.  105 

voice:  they  shall  never  perish,  neither  shall  any 
pluck  them  out  of  my  hands.  ?vly  Father  vvliich 
GAVE  them  me  is  greater  than  all,  and  none  can 
pluck  tliem  out  of  my  Father's  liancl."  And  to 
the  same  covenant  transaction  does  tlie  apostle 
allude,  when  he  speaks  of  ^^eternai  life  promised 
before  the  world  began'''' — (Tit.  1:  2) — promised 
not  to  men  hut  to  Christ — for  as  many  as  the 
Father  "had  GIVEN  him." 

But  in  the  arrangements  of  tliat  covenant,  v^^ere 
not  faith,  repentance,  and  good  works  foreseen, 
as  the  grounds  or  reasons  why  his  sheep  were 
given  to  the  Savior?  The  answer  is,  "By  grace 
are  ye  saved,  through  /<:a7A,  and  that  not  of  your- 
selves? it  is  the  GIFT  of  God."*  Christ  is  "ex- 
alted to  bs  a  prince  and  a  Savior  TO  GIVE  re- 
pentance to  Israel  and  remission  of  sins."    These, 

*  r\Ir.  \Vct^Iey's  undcrstandirig- of  the  manner  in  which 
faith  is  the  ghl  of  God,  is  sln^riilar  enough,  lie  says, 
'^Believing  is  the  gift  of  the  God  0/ GRACE,  as  breath- 
ing,  moving-,  and  eating,  are  the  gilts  of  the  God  of  NA- 
TURE. He  gives  ine  lungs  and  air,  that  I  may  breathe," 
<feo.  Again:  '■'■Faith  is  tlie  gift  of  God  to  believers,  as 
sight  is  to  you.  The  Parent  of  good  freely  gives  you  the 
light  of  the  sun,  and  organs  proper  to  receive  it,"  &c. 
But  if  this  be  a  correct  account  of  the  matter,  unbelief  is 
as  much  the  gift  of  God  as  faith.,  since  the  powers  and 
faculties  by  vi'hich  a  man  discredits  divine  truth,  are  the 
gift  of  God,  as  much  as  those  by  vi^hich  he  believes.  If, 
however,  Mr.  Wesley  designed  to  teach,  that  besides  the 
faculties  of  mind,  Divine  power  and  grace  impart  also  the 
9* 


100  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

therefore,  whicli  are  the  fruits  of  liis  Spirit,  and 
of  his  covenant  love  and  mercy,  cannot  be  sup- 
posed to  be  the  grounds  or  reasons  of  that  of 
which  they  are  the  fruiis  or  results.  Christ 
liimself  is  "the  AUTHOR  and  finisher  of  faith." 
(Ilcb.  12:2.)  And  the  very  question  to  be  settled 
is,  What  are  the  grounds  or  reasons  wliy  these 
and  other  gifts  are  bestowed  upon  Christ's  sheep, 
and  not  upon  others?  To  say  with  the  Arminian 
that  it  is  because  of  foreseen  faith,  is  to  make  faith 
the  cause  of  itself,  is  to  say  that  Christ  gives  faith 
and  repentance  to  certain  persons,  because  he 
finds  them  already  possessing  faith  and  repent- 
ance! Besides,  "God  hath  from  the  beginning 
CHOSEN  them  unto  salvation,  through  sanctid- 
cation  of  the  Spirit  and  belief  o^  the  truth;"  where 
fnith  and  holiness  are  declared  to  be  the  means, 
not  the  7noving  causes,  of  their  election.  Will  it 
be  said  that  sufficient  grace  is  common  to  all,  and 
that  the  reason  why  any  one  believes  and  is  saved 
is,  because  he  makes  a  good  improvement  of  the 
grace  given  him?  We  inquire,  Is  this  ^^improve- 
ment'^  a  work  of  righteousness?  If  so,  the  apostle 
declares  repeatedly,  ^^JVot  by  ivorks  of  righteous- 
dispositions  of  heart  by  which  a  man  welcomes  and  re- 
ceives gfladly  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  in  the  love  of  it, 
this  is  the  high  Calvinism  of  Paul.  "It  is  God  that  xcork- 
eth  in  you  both  TO  WILL  and  TO  DO  of  his  good 
pleasure."     Philip.  2 :13. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  107 

ness  which  we  have  done,  but  according  lo  Ids 
mercy  he  saved  us;"  where  he  places  in  strong 
contrast  the  two  schemes  of  salvation  by  works 
and  salvation  by  mercy  or  grace.  "Not  of  works, 
lest  any  man  should  boast.''^  "To  him  that 
workcth,  is  the  reward  not  reckoned  of  grace,  but 
of  debt.'' ^  "But  if  it  be  of  works,  then  it  is  no 
more  grace;  otherwise  work  is  no  more  work." 
(Rom.  11:6.)  In  such  emphatic  terms  does  he 
teach  the  impossibility  of  minghng  with  salvation 
by  grace,  the  miserable  efforts  of  man.  But  if 
election  be  founded  on  man's  i?nprove)nent,  then, 
to  all  intents  and  purposes,  man  makes  himself  to 
'^ differ, ^^  or  elects  himself;  so  that  when  the  apos- 
tle gave  thanks  to  God  for  his  brethren  and  for 
himself,  because  "God  had  from  the  beginning 
CHOSEN  them  unto  saIvaiio7i,-^  supposing  him 
to  have  been  a  sound  Methodist,  we  must  under- 
stand him  as  follows:  "God,  I  thank  thee,  that 
from  eternity  thou  didst  foresee  that  I  and  my 
brethren  would  make  a  much  better  improvement 
of  thy  grace  than  many  of  our  neighbors,  and  that 
we  would  choose  thee,  and  therefore  thou  hast 
chosen  us  unto  salvation;  so  that  with  our  ^good 
leave,''  our  consent  to  do  our  part  of  the  work, 
and  to  make  choice  of  thee  in  preference  to  the 
world,  thou  hast  chosen  us;  in  view  of  which 
great  mercies,  we  render  thanks  to  ourselves  in 


108  TiiK    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

the  first  plac(»,  for  our  faitliAiIness,  niul  the  jrreat 
■hnprovcmcnt  we  liavo  made,  by  which  we  have 
furnislied  a  reason  or  ground  upon  wliich  God 
hath  chosen  ns  niito  salvation!" 

We  freely  admit  that  no  j^'ioiis  person,  how- 
ever Arminian  his  creed,  will  ever  be  fonnd  bold 
enough  to  utter  such  sentiments  upon  his  knees, 
ill  tlie  immediate  presence  of  God.  It  is  a  re- 
mark no  more  trite  tlian  true,  that  all  good  men 
are  Calviuists  in  their  addresses  at  the  throne  of 
grace.  But  it  is  demonstrably  the  fact,  that  not- 
withstanding all  that  is  said  against  Predestina- 
tion, as  destroying  the  necessity  and  use  of  prayer 
and  the  other  means  of  grace,  tlio  objection  lies 
widi  ten-fold  force?  against  Arniinianism.  The 
("alvinist  believes,  that  though  ttic  means  of  grace, 
imlnding  prayer,  are  of  themselves  entirely  inef- 
ficacious in  producing  any  good  result;  yet  that 
God  has  ordained  a  connection  between  means 
and  ends,  by  which,  through  his  power  and  Spirit, 
'  'lencvcr  properly  employed,  his  own  institu- 
tions become  efficient  to  accomplish  that  to  which 
they  are  sent.  But  when  the  Arminian  attempts 
to  pray,  what  can  he,  consistently  with  his  prin- 
ciples, ^'inquire  for  ?^^  He  cannot  ask  God  to 
convert  sinners;  for,  as  we  have  already  seen,  he 
could  only  mean,  that  God  would  *^note^'  the 
J aithfidness  and  improvement  which  they  have 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  109 

made,  and  according  to  this  knowledge,  deal  with 
them  righteously;  a  course  which  the  most  Holy 
will  certainly  pursue,  whether  he  prays  for  it  or 
not.  Neither  can  he  request  that  God  will  re- 
strain the  wickedness  of  men,  and  incline  them 
to  good;  for  that,  the  Arminian  thinks,  would  be 
such  an  "efficient  control"  over  t'neir  actions,  as 
to  destroy  their  free  agency.  Nor  yet  can  he 
pray  for  grace  to  enable  the  sinner  to  repent  and 
believe;  for  he  contends  that  every  man  has  al- 
ready sufficient  grace  and  ability.  And  as  to 
praying  for  more  grace,  he  holds  that  every  man 
receives  grace  accordingly  as  he  works  for  it;  and 
by  the  supposition,  those  for  whom  he  prays, 
have  been  "careless  ones  from  their  youth  up- 
ward." The  Arminian  dare  not  ask  God  efftclu- 
ally  to  overcorae  *  the  rebellious  heart;  for  thi» 

*  The  doctrine  Ox  irresistible  grace  has  been  a  fruitful 
topic  of  discourse  to  our  ArinJaian  friends.  Will  they 
take  the  trouble  to  understand  it?  Calvinists  believe  and 
teach  that  men  may  and  do  "resist  the  Holy  Ghost"  — 
"grieve  and  even  quench  the  Spirit.''  But  the  question  is 
not  whether  men  often  stifle  the  operations  of  the  Spirit 
of  grace,  but  vv^hcther,  Vii'hen  it  is  the  good  pleasure  of 
God  to  convert  and  save  a  sinner,  he  is  able  to  employ  suf- 
Jicient  power  to  secure  his  object?  In  otlicr  words,  whe- 
ther God  is  able  to  use  means  and  infiucnces  v/hich  will 
overcome  his  depraved  heart  and  all  its  resistance;  or 
whether  the  sinner  may  so  resist  the  Sj)irit  and  grace  of 
God,  as  to  overcome  the  Almighty,  and  defeat  his  design 
or  purpose  of  mercy?  Calvinists  believe  that  God  is  able 
to  conquer  all  resistance.     Armiaians  take  the  opposite 


110  THE    T)IFFICI)LTIT\S    OF 

would  be  askin!^  for  efficacious  or  special  grace^ 
not  bestowed  upon  all  men.  This  would  repre- 
sent the  Divine  Being  as  "partial,"  and  a  "res- 
pecter of  persons." 

Besides,  "What  the  creature  will  do,"  says 
V/atson,  (vol.  2,  p.  435,)  "in  fact  is  known  be- 
forehand, with  a  perfect  prescience;"  "and  what 
God  has  defcrinined  to  do,  is  made  apparent  by 
what  he  actnally  does,  which  can  be  no  new,  no 
sudden  thouglu,  but  biGicn  and  PURPOSED 
from  cterniiy,  in  view  of  the  actual  circumstan- 
ces." Now,  vv'ill  the  Arniinian  inform  us,  whe- 
ther he  expects  his  prayers  will  reverse  the  ;;cr- 
fed  foreknowledge  and  PURPOSE  of  God, 
which  Watson  alTirms  to  be  "from  eternity?" 
Well  may  the  Calvinist  bless  God  that  he  has 
been  led  to  adopt  a  system  of  doctrines  which  he 
13  not  obliged  to  abandon,  whenever  he  opens  his 
lips  to  plead  for  the  favor  of  Ucaven  upon  him- 
self and  all  mankind. 

3.  A  tliird  topic  demanding  a  brief  notice  in  its 
connection  Avilh   the  doctrine  of  Predestination, 

view,  viz.,  that  grace  is  not  so  irresistible,  but  tliat  the 
sinnei'  in  many  cases  gets  the  belter  of  ODDiipotoncc.  Of 
course  it  would  be  tolly  to  pray  to  the  Divine  Being  to  do 
what  he  is  unahle  to  perform.  On  this  scheme,  tiio 
prayers  should  be  offered  to  the  sinner,  to  obtain  his 
"good  leave,"  as  Wesley  has  it,  to  be  converted,  and  ihcu 
the  work  would  bs  easy. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  Ill 

relates  to  the  character  7m<\  final  dcsilny  of  those 
of  mankind  who  will  never  realize  the  saving 
blessings  of  the  Gospel,  but  will  perish  under  the 
divine  v/rath.  The  views  of  Calvinists  upon 
these  subjects  have  furnished  abundant  matter  of 
denunciation  and  misrepresentation  to  our  Meth- 
odist neighbors.  "Does  it  come  to  pass  that 
some  are  lost?"  inquires  Dr.  Fisk,  (Disc.  pp.  26, 
27.)  "Then  this  v.-as  ordained.  Was  sin  ne- 
cessary as  2.  pretence  to  damn  them?  Then  this 
was  ordamed.  They  (Calvinists)  must  believe 
that  Glod  determined  to  create  men  and  angels  for 
the  express  purpose  to  damn  them  eternally;  that 
he  determined  to  introduce  sin,  and  influence  men 
to  commit  sin,  and  harden  them  in  it,  that  they 
might  be  fit  subjects  of  his  wrath,"  &c.  &c.  &c. 
Not  to  repeat  what  has  been  said  in  answer  to 
the  inquiry,  "Why  does  sin  exist?"  we  cannot 
conceal  our  surprise  that  the  Rev.  President  of  the 
Wesleyan  University  should  seem  to  be  ignorant 
of  the  common  Calvinistic  distinction  between 
^'-efficient  and  permissive  decrees."  Besides,  if 
Dr.  Fisk  had  ever  read  the  Presbyterian  Confes- 
sion, he  would  have  found  written,  of  those  who 
perish,  that  "God  was  pleased  to  pass  them  by, 
and  to  ordain  them  to  dishonor  and  wrath  ybr 
their  sin.^^  (Conf.,  chap.  3,  sect.  7.)  And  of 
those  "who  do  never  truly  come  (o  Jesus  Christ/' 


113  THE    DIFFICTTLTIE*   OF 

that  "they  are  justly  left  in  unbelief,  for  their 
wilful  neglect  and  contempt  of  the  grace  offered 
them."  (Conf.,  p.  180.)  The  reason,  therefore, 
why  they  are  not  saved  is,  that  they  "^/o  not 
come  to  Jesus  Christ.^^  They  do  not  come  to 
Jesus  Christ,  because  "  they  are  justly  left  in 
unbelief. ^^  And  they  are  justly  left  in  unbelief, 
because  of  "their  ivilful  neglect  and  contempt  of 
the  grace  offered  them."  "If  they  M'ill  add  new 
obstinacy  and  hardness  to  their  minds  and  hearts," 
says  Dr.  Owen,  the  great  advocate  of  Calvinism; 
"if  they  will  fortify  themselves  against  the  word 
with  prejudice  and  dislike;  if  they  will  resist  its 
operations  through  their  lusts  and  corrupt  affec- 
tions, God  may  justly  leave  them  to  perish,  and 
to  be  filled  with  the  fruit  of  their  own  ways." 
"They  perish  not  by  a  mere  continuance  in  the 
state  wherein  the  word  finds  them,  but  by  reject- 
ing the  counsel  of  God  made  known  to  them  for 
their  healing  and  recovery."*  Is  this  the  same 
with  ^influencing  men  to  sin,  and  hardening 
them  in  it,  as  a  pretence  to  damn  them?''''  The 
doctrine  of  permissive  decrees  is  taught  at  large 
by  Turretine,  Fisher,t  Ridgeley,  Edwards,  and  a 

*  Expos,  of  the  Heb.,  vol.  2,  p.  354. 

t  Take  the  following  specimen  from  the  Exposition  of 
the  Assembly's  Catecliism,  composed  by  the  Erskines  of 
Scotland,  and  James  Fisher.     Q.  "How  does  the  decree 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  IIS 

liost  of  Others  of  our  writers.     Had  the  DoCtor^s 
reading  been  all  on  one  side?     Yet  he  not  only- 
attempts  to  quote  the  Presbyterian  Confession, 
as  we  shall  presently  see,  but  informs  us  that  he 
is  combating  a  doctrine  upon  which  ^^agree  all 
the  Calvinistic  divines  in  Europe  and  America!" 
It  is  easy  to  reply,  that   these  are  "smooth 
things,"  adapted  to  conceal  from  public  view  the 
odious  features  of  genuine  Predestination.     It  is 
a  matter  both  of  surprise  and  regret,  to  find  even 
Dr.  Fisk  giving  currency  to  the  stale  slanders 
which  aie  abroad  upon  this  subjeci,  and  descend- 
ing so  far  as  to  misquote  and  grossly  misrepresent 
-our  Confession  of  Faith.     Thu&,  in  his  "Dis- 
^ouTse  on  Predestination  and  Election,"  p.  15, 
ihe  cites  chap.  3,  sect.  5,  ^as  follows:  <'Those  of 
mankind  that  are  predestinated  unto  life,  Go4, 
before  the  foundation  of  the  world,  hath  chosen 
in  Christ  unto   everlasting   glory,  without  any 
foresight  of  faith  or  good  works.''     This  last 
clause  the  Dr.  has  put  m  italics,  and  has  entirely- 
omitted  the  rest  of  the  passage — ^'without  any 

of  God  extend  to  things  naturally  and  morally  good?" 
Ans.  "Effectively;  because  God  is  the  author  and  efficient 
•cause  of  all  good."  Q.  "How  does  it  extend  to  things 
morally  evil?"  Ans.  '■''Permissively  and  directively  only." 
Q.  "Is  the  permissive  decree  a  bare  inactive  permitting 
of  evil?"  Ans.  "No.  It  determines  the  event  of  the  evil, 
and  overrules  it  to  a  good  end."  This  was  written  in 
1753,  '65.  The  book  is  a  standard  among  CalvinistSi 
10 


114  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

foresight  of  faiih  or  good  works" — ^uts  CGndi- 
iions  or  causes  inoving  Mm  thereto-' — which 
states  simply  the  fact  that  as  all  men  are  "by  na- 
ture the  children  of  wrath,"  and  merit  only  ever- 
lasting destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord, 
the  design  of  mercy,  the  whole  plan  of  salvation 
in  decree  and  execution,  does  not  flow  from  any 
merit  or  goodness  of  the  sinner,  '•^moving  HhrC 
(God)  to  elect  him — the  originating  cause  of  elec- 
tion, and  the  ground  of  the  determination  to  save 
the  sinner,  was  not  a  ^^foresight  of  faith  or  good 
works, ''^  for  of  these  he  would  have  none  until 
grace  should  bestow  them;  but  simply  the  sove- 
reign mercy  of  God.     And  indeed,  this  seems  to 
be  the  view  of  Dr.  F.  himself,  v/hen  he  tells  us, 
(p.  15,)  "God  did  decree  to  elect  in  Christ  all 
that  should  believe  unto  salvation;  p.nd  this  decree 
proceeds  from  his  own  goodness,  and  is  not  built 
on  any  goodness  of  the  creature."     But  on  the 
next  page  he  abandons  this  sound  Calvinism,  and 
seriously  asserts  that  "the  sinner  is   elected  be- 
cause he  receives  Christ,"  v/hich  is  the  same  as 
to  say,  "he  is  elected  because  of  something  done 
by  himself,  some  M'ork  of  his  own;"  and  if  Dr. 
Fjsk  admit  receiving  Christ  to  be  a  good  work, 
(and  certainly  it  is  not  an  evil  work,)  then  he  is 
elected  because  of  his  own  goodness  in  receiving 
Christ,  although  this  writer  had  said,  a  few  lines 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  115 

above,  that  the  decree  to  elect  is  not  built  on  any 
goodness  of  the  creature!  Alas,  for  a  system  that 
must  be  supported  by  sncli  contradictions! 

Another  sectarian  nianceuvre  employed  by  our 
Arminian  friends  is,  to  represent  modern  Calvin- 
ists  as  having  been  forced  to  forsake  the  old  land- 
marks of  Geneva  Theology,  so  called;  while  (at 
the  same  time)  the  honesty  of  our  new  profes- 
sions is  strongly  called  in  question.  "Those 
early  defenders  of  unconditional  election,"  re- 
marks Dr.  Fisk,  "came  out  boldly  and  fearlessly 
with  their  doctrine.  \(  modern  Calvinists  would 
do  the  same,  we  should  need  no  other  refutation 
of  the  system."  "At  the  present  day,  numerous 
changes  of  a  more  popular  cast,  and  such  as  are 
suited  to  cover  up  the  offensive  features  of  the 
system,  are  introduced."  "  To  represent  the 
thing  as  it  is,  seems  so  like  accusing  our  breth- 
ren of  insincerity  and  duplicity,''^  &c.  "And 
being  hard  pressed  by  their  antagonists,  they  have 
thrown  up  these  new  redoubts,  and  assumed 
these  new  positions,  not  only  to  CONCEAL 
their  doctrine,  but  if  possible  to  defend  it."  (Disc. 
Predes.  and  Elec.) 

It  is  not  unworthy  of  remark,  that  the  Papists, 
Pelagians,  and  Socinians,  of  Turretine's  day,  era- 
ployed  this  same  shabby  artifice.  Thus  they  ac- 
cused the  orthodox — "reipsa  sentire,  quod  verbo 


116  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

profiteri  non  audent" — ^^ivith  holding  scplimenis 
they  did  not  dare  openly  to  profess.^^  And  Tur- 
retine  tells  us,  to  such  men  as  Zuingle,  Luther, 
Calvin,  Beza,  and  others,  the  atrocious  injury- 
was  done,  (atrocem  fieri  mjuriam.) 

For  the  sake  of  Dr.  F.,  who  seems  to  be  in  the 
dark  upon  this  point,  we  will  translate  a  few 
passages  from  the  "Institutio  Theologiffi"  of  the 
forementioned  author,  premising  that  he  was 
Professor  of  Theology  at  Geneva,  born  1623, 
died  1687.  He  was  one  of  the  brightest  orna- 
ments of  that  celebrated  school  of  the  propliels. 
His  system  is  now  a  standard  work  among  Cal- 
vinists,  and  is  used  at  Princeton,  N.  J.,  as  a  text- 
book. 

Decrees. — "Decree  is  ascribed  to  God,  not 
as  the  efTect  of  deliberation  and  previous  consulta- 
tion, but  as  a  certain  determination  respecting  the 
future  existence  of  things."  "The  decree,  in 
respect  of  its  objects,  often  includes  a  certain  con- 
dition, but  is  nevertheless  in  its  own  nature  abso- 
lute; because  both  the  condition  and  conditional 
event  depend  immutably  upon  God,  either  in 
respect  of  permission  in  things  that  are  wicked, 
or  of  efficiency  m  things  that  are  good;  (vcl  quoad 
pcrmissionem  ut  in  malis,  vel  quoad  cllcctioncm 
in  bonis.") 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  117 

Necessity.— Our  author  affirms  that  the  divine 
decree  implies  the  necessity  of  future  events;  but 
he  expressly  disclaims  the  idea  of  an  absolute  or 
physical  necessity,  as  also  the  necessity  oi  coer- 
cion or  force;  and  teaches  a  necessity  which  res* 
pects  only  the  certainty  of  the  future  existence 
of  the  event,  which  is  the  object  of  the  decree, 
(respectu  certitudinis  eventus  et  futuritionis  ex 
decreto.)  And  in  reply  to  the  objection  that  this 
doctrine  makes  God  tlie  author  of  sin,  he  says  of 
the  decree,  *'non  est  effectivum  mali,  sed  tantum 
permissivum  et  directivum" — it  is  not  efficient  of 
evil,  but  only  permissive  and  directive  to  prope? 
ends."  In  this  particular  our  author  follows  the 
great  Calvin,  (B.  1,  chap.  16,  sect.  8.)  "What 
God  decrees,  must  necessarily  come  to  pass,  yet 
it  is  not  by  an  absolute  or  natural  necessity. ^^ 

Election  he  defines,  *'the  counsel  of  God,  in 
which  he  decreed  out  of  his  mere  grace  to  hav« 
compassion  upon  certain  persons,  and  being  de* 
livered  from  their  sins  tiirough  his  Son,  to  bestow 
upon  them  eternal  salvation."  "The  decree  of 
eternal  life  and  eternal  death  has  respect  to  man 
as  fallen,  (respicere  hominem  lapsum.)  Other- 
wise he  says,  we  represent  "God  as  having  repro- 
bated man  before  by  sin  he  could  be  the  proper 
object  of  reprobation;  and  as  having  sentenced  the 
innocent  to  punishment,  before  any  fault  was 
10* 


lis  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

foreseen  in  them.^^  "By  the  decree  of  God,  the 
salvation  of  the  elect  is  established  and  certain, 
but  by  the  decree  of  the  same  God  only  in  the 
way  -of  faith  and  holiness." 

Reprobation. — This  term,  though  not  found  in 
the  Presbyterian  Confession,  is  frequently  em- 
ployed by  our  best  writers.  Reprobation,  ac- 
cording to  Turretine,  includes  two  acts,  a  nega- 
tive and  a  positive.  The  negative  act  is  that  by 
which  the  reprobate  are  passed  by,  and  are  not  ef- 
fectually called  and  regenerated  by  the  grace  and 
Spirit  of  God.  Regarded  as  involved  in  the  com- 
mon mass  of  sin  and  corruption,  being  "children 
of  wrath  even  as  others,"  God  is  under  no  obli- 
gation to  save  them,  nor  to  bestow  any  favor  up- 
on them;  and  the  sins  of  which  they  are  guilty, 
are  the  natural  fruits  of  their  depraved  hearts,  and 
follow  the  absence  of  restraining  grace  as  natu- 
rally as  darkness  succeeds  the  absence  of  the  sun. 
Nor  is  God  the  cause  or  author  of  their  sins,  ex- 
cept as  the  sun  is  the  cause  of  cold  or  darkness. 
**God  denies  the  grace  which  they  themselves  are 
unwilling  to  receive,  or  to  retain,  and  which  they 
voluntarily  despise,  since  they  desire  nothing  less 
than  to  be  under  the  control  of  the  Holy  iSpirit. 
He  does  not  deny  grace  that  they  may  sin,  but  in 
just  punishment  for  their  sin." 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  119 

The  positive  act  of  reprobation,  according  to 
our  author,  "is  that  by  which  God  has  resolved  to 
inflict  merited  punishment  upon  persons  remain- 
ing in  a  state  of  nature,  and  having  voluntarily 
abused  (sua  sponte  abuses)  the  light  of  nature  and 
of  the  Gospel  ministered  unto  them."  "Sin 
must  necessarily  be  supposed  as  the  condition  in 
him  who  is  reprobated;"  "neither  can  there  be  in 
God  the  will  to  punish  any  but  a  sinner." 

"Reprobation,"  he  continues,  "may  be  consid- 
ered absolutely  or  comparatively.  In  the  abso- 
lute sense,  it  is  rightly  ascribed  to  the  corruption 
of  the  natural  man,  which  has  made  him  justly  an 
object  of  reprobation.  When,  therefore,  it  is  in- 
quired why  any  man  is  reprobated,  it  is  well  re- 
plied— because,  by  his  sin,  he  was  deserving  of 
such  treatment.  But  when  the  subject  is  regard- 
ed in  the  comparative  light,  when  it  is  inquired 
why  one  wicked  person  is  reprobated  rather  than 
another,  (cur  unus  prae  alio  reprobatur,)  it  must 
be  referred  to  the  good  pleasure  of  God,  who 
elects  or  passes  by  according  to  his  sovereign 
will:  sin  being  common  to  all,  cannot  be  alleged 
as  the  ground  of  this  distinction."  "God  may  be 
said  to  predestinate  to  sin  and  hardness  of  heart, 
not  efficiently,  but  permissively,  and  so  as  to  di- 
rect and  overrule  the  event" — (non  effective,  sed 
permissive  et  directive,  quatenus  illam  permittere 


120  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

et  ordinare  dsfrevit.)  Compare  these  statements 
with  the  impious  carricature  drawn  hy  Dr.  Fisk. 
But  the  Presbyterian  Conf.  is  again  summoned 
as  a  witness  to  convict  us  of  the  monstrous  impiety 
laid  to  our  charge  by  Dr.  F.  "The  ahnighly 
power,  unsearchable  wisdom,  and  infinite  good- 
ness of  God,  do  so  far  manifest  themselves  in  his 
providence,  that  it  cxtendeth  itself  to  the  first  fall 
and  all  other  sins  of  angels  and  men,  and  that  not 
by  a  bare  permission,  but  such  as  hath  joined  with 
it  a  most  wise  and  powerful  bounding,  and  other- 
wise ordering  and  governing  of  them  in  a  manifold 
dispensation  to  his  own  holy  ends."  Conf.,  chap. 
5,  sect.  4.  This  passage  is  supposed  to  assert 
such  an  "•efficient  controV  over  all  the  actions  of 
men  and  angels,  as  to  represent  God  as  the  au- 
thor of  all  their  sins.  Now  it  might  be  a  suflS- 
cient  reply  to  this,  simply  to  quote  the  remainder 
of  the  section,  viz.:  "le/  50  as  the  sinfulness 
(hereof  (of  wicked  actions)  proccedeth  only  from 
the  creature,  not  from  God,''  The  very  section, 
adduced  in  proof  that  Presbyterians  teach  that 
God  is  the  author  of  sin,  utterly  disclaims  such  a 
sentiment.  Is  it  fair,  to  attempt  to  prove  us 
guilty  of  an  impious  dogma,  by  refering  to  an  ar- 
ticle which  expressly  disclaims  it?  Further: 
Let  us  insert  in  the  body  of  the  foregoing  article, 
the  negative  which  denies  its  truth,  and  how  will 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  121 

it  read?  Thus:  "The  almighty  power,  unsearch- 
able wisdom,  and  infinite  goodness  of  God,  do 
not  so  fiir  manifest  themselves  in  his  providence, 
as  to  extend  either  to  the  first  fall,  or  to  any  other 
of  the  sins  of  angels  and  men,  except  by  a  bare 
permission,  which  has  not  joined  with  it  any  wise 
and  powerful  bounding,  (i.  e.  limiting  or  restrain- 
ing;) nor  does  God  order  (or  overrule)  and  govern 
them,. in  a  manifold  dispensation,  to  any  holy 
end."  In  the  act  of  sin,  therefore,  creatures  are 
left  beyond  the  reach"  of  divine  Providence;  they 
are  without  any  overruling  power,  and  beyond 
the  Uinit  of  any  wise  and  poiverful  restraint,  for 
holy  and  benevolent  purposes!  Moreover,  where 
there  is  no  government,  there  is  no  law,  and 
where  there  is  no  law,  there  is  no  transgression. 
In  the  act  oT  sin,  therefore,  it  is  impossible  to  sin!! 
In  truth, -this  article  is  only  a  full  expression  of 
the  sentiment  of  the  Psalmist — "The  wrath  of 
man  shall  praise  thee,  and  the  remainder  of  wrath 
thou  wilt  restrain."    Do  Methodists  deny  this! 

Once  more  our  Confession  is  brought  to  testify 
against  us.  Thus,  chap.  3,  sect.  2 — "Although 
God  knows  whatsoever  may  or  can  come  to  pass, 
yet  has  he  not  decreed  any  thing  because  he  fore- 
saw it  as  future,"  &c.  But  can  any  person  of 
sense  maintain  the  affirmative  of  this  article,  viz., 
"that  God  ha^  decreed  many  things  because  he 


122  THK    DIFFICT  LTIIvS    OF 

foresaw  them  as  future?"  How  will  it  work  with 
his  positive  or  efficient  decrees — say  to  make  or 
judg-e  the  world?  Has  God  decreed  (or  deter- 
mined) to  do  either  of  these  great  acts,  bccauae  he 
foresaw  he  would  perform  them?  The  question 
answers  itself.  Let  us  try  it  v/ith  his  permissive 
decrees.  Does  God  foresee  that  he  will  j}ermit 
certain  conduct,  and  not  till  then,  decree  (or  de- 
termine) to  permit  it?  A  child  would  pronounce 
it  nonsense  to  talk  of  a  Being  foreseeing'  that  he 
will  do  certain  things,  and  theji,  not  before,  de- 
termining- to  do  them. 

Again  it  is  objected  that  our  Confession  of 
Faith  teaches  that  the  angels  and  men  who  are 
predestinated,  "are  particularly  and  unchangeably 
desigjied;  and  their  number  is  so  certain  and  defi- 
nite, that  it  cannot  be  either  increased  or  dimin- 
ished." Conf.,  chap.  3,  sect.  4.  But  what  is  the 
language  of  Methodism  in  her  standard  publica- 
tions, in  reference  to  this  subject?  ^'I  believe  the 
eternal  decree  concerning  both  (election  and  rep- 
robation) is  expressed  in  these  v\^ords,  'He  that 
believeth  shall  be  saved,  and  he  that  believeth  not 
shall  be  damned.'  And  this  decree,  without 
doubt,  God  will  not  change,  and  man  cannot  re- 
sist." Doct.  Tracts,  p.  15.  Now  add  to  this 
*'  eternal,  unchangeable,  irresistible  decree"  of 
Methodism,  the  admitted  truth,  that  God  infalli- 


ARMIMAN    METHODISM.  123 

bly  foreknotvs^  individually,  personally,  by  name 
and  by  number,  the  identical  persons  to  whom  it 
will  secure  salvation,  and  to  whom  it  will  secure 
perdition — that  the  number  of  the  saved,  and  the 
number  of  the  lost,  are  as  certainly  known  and 
marked  in  the  divine  prescience,  as  though  that 
precise  number  of  persons  had  already  been  ad- 
mitted to  heaven,  and  that  other  precise  number 
been  cast  down  to  hell.  Most  manifestly,  then, 
"the  number  of  the  predestmated  is  so  definite, 
that  it  cannot  be  either  increased  or  diminished," 
UNLESS  the  divine  foreknowledge  be  mere  con- 
jecture, and  He  who  knows  all  things,  has  made 
a  mistake.  "Whatever  God  foreknows,"  says 
Dr.  Fisk,  "will  undoubtedly  (or  certainly j  come 
to  pass."  He  foreknows  the  exact  number  who 
will  believe  and  be  saved — that  exact  number  will 
undoubtedly  be  saved.  He  foreknows  the  exact 
number  who  will  refuse  to  believe  and  perish — 
that  exact  number  will  undoubtedly  (or  certainly) 
perish.  This  argument  might  be  extended  to  a 
great  length,  at  every  step  multiplying  the  embar- 
rassments of  our  opponents.  We  might  question 
the  moral  honesty,  and  "expose  the  duplicity"  of 
those  who,  notwithstanding  this  infallible  desig- 
nation, on  their  own  principles,  of  the  number  of 
the  saved  and  lost,  do  nevertheless  urge,  exhort, 
intreat  sinners  to  "flee  from  the  wrath  to  come." 


\^i  THE    DirricDLTlES    0> 

Do  tlicy  expect  to  change  a  "fixed  and  infallible 
certainty?"  Or  is  it  "to  lull  the  people  into 
favor?"  Slc.  &;c.  &c.  How  will  they,  on  these 
principles,  evince  the  sincerity  of  God,  in  makinor 
the  offers  of  salvation,  where  they  are  infallibly 
certain  to  be  despised,  or  his  mercy  in  originally 
creating  beings  who  Mere  infallibly  certain  to  be 
miserable  forever;  or  his  grace  in  giving  his  well 
beloved  Son  to  die,  to  make  an  atonement  and 
purchase  a  salvation,  by  shedding  his  blood  for 
thousands,  for  whom  these  blessings  M^ere  infal- 
libly certain  to  result  only  in  the  aggravation  of 
iheir  unutterable  wo? 

Mr.  Wesley,  in  his  notes  on  1  Pet.  1:  2,  says, 
"Election,  in  the  Scripture  sense,  is  God's  doing 
any  thing  that  our  merit  or  power  have  no  part 
in."  And  elsewhere,  "I  do  not  hold  God  chose 
any  man  fo  life  and  salvation  for  any  good  which 
he  had  done,  or  for  any  which  was  in  him  before 
he  put  it  there — the  whole  of  that  wdiich  is  good 
in  him,  even  from  the  first  moment  of  his  will, 
being  of  grace,  not  of  nature."  Doct.  Tracts. 
Again  he  tells  us,  "God  from  the  foundation  of 
the  world  foreknew  all  men's  believing  or  not  be- 
lieving; and  according  to  this  his  foreknowledge 
he  elected  all  obedient  believers,  as  such,  to  sal- 
vation." "He  elected  all  obedient  believers,  as 
such" — but  how  did  they  become  "5?/c/i.^"     Mr. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISftt.  125 

W.  assures  us  that  there  is  no  good  in  man  *^till 
God  put  it  there;'"  and  if  obedient  believing  be 
any  thing  good,  then  "//e  put  it  there.^^  He 
made  them  to  differ.  But  when  did  God  deter- 
mine  to  put  this  good  thing  in  the  heart  of  the 
sinner?  Obviously  he  determined  to  do  it  before 
he  did  it*  And  if  before  the  act,  why  not  from 
eternity,  ''since  known  unto  him  are  all  his  works 
from  the  foundation  of  the  world?"  And  it  is 
supreme  folly  to  speak  of  his  infallibly  knowing 
that  He  would  perform  an  act,  without  his  having 
determined  (or  decreed)  to  perform  it.  It  were 
easy  to  fill  pages  with  similar  examples,  where 
the  zealous  opponents  of  the  doctrine  of  election 
are  driven  by  the  force  of  truth,  to  admit  in  sub- 
stance, what  they  earnes'tly  denounce  in  form — an 
instructive  proof  that  the  grand  principles  of  the 
doctrine,  laying  out  of  view  the  express  declara- 
tions of  Holy  Writ,  are  founded  in  the  plainest 
conceptions  of  common  sense* 

Pressed  with  these  and  similar  difficulties,  the 
advocates  of  Metliodism  are  forced  continually 
into  positions  in  argument,  where  the  total  denial 
of  one  or  more  of  the  divine  perfections  is  most 
easy,  and  if  logically  pursued,  inevitable;  and  the 
whole  tendency  of  the  system  is  to  dethrone  the 
Great  Supreme  from  the  government  of  the  uni- 
verse, and  throw  the  intelligent  creation  loose 
11 


126  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OV 

from  the  control  of  an  all-directing  Providence. 
The  omniscient  God  may  indeed  foreknow  the 
actions  of  his  creatures,  but  to  circumscribe,  regu- 
late, and  fix  their  place  in  his  all-wise  plan,  is,  in 
the  view  of  Methodism,  to  divest  them  of  an  es- 
sential attribute  of  free  agency;  and  what  is  mon- 
strous, beyond  conception,  is,  to  charge  the  thrice 
Holy  God  with  the  authorship  of  all  the  sin  in 
the  universe! 

POSTSCRIPT   TO  LETTER  III. 

"Calvin  burned  Servetus,"  is  the  common  and 
conclusive  reply  to  all  that  can  be  said  in  defence 
of  the  system  which  bears  his  name.  And  epi- 
thets of  infamy  are  heaped  upon  his  character 
"without  mercy  and  without  end.  The  following 
testimonials  in  favor  of  the  illustrious  Reformer, 
merit  consideration  from  their  origin. 

1.  The  following  are  the  words  of  Arminius: 
*'I  exhort  students  to  read,  after  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, Calvin's  Commentaries,  who  is  INCOM- 
PARABLE in  the  interpretation  of  the  sacred 
volume.  And  his  expositions  ought  to  be  more 
highly  valued  than  all  the  writings  of  the  ancient 
Christian  fathers — so  that  in  a  certain  eminent 
spirit  of  prophecy,  I  give  him  the  pre-eminence 
beyond  most,  nay  all  others.''     See  the  trans- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  127 

lator's  remarks,  prefixed  to  the  American  edition 
of  Calvin  on  Romans. 

2.  Rev.  John  Wesley:  "I  believe  Calvin  was 
a  great  i  istrument  of  God,  and  that  he  was  a 
ivise  and  PIOUS  man."  "John  Calvin  was  a 
pious,  learned,  sensible  man."  IMisc.  Works, 
vols.  1  and  2,  pages  546,  475.  Such  were  the 
sentiments  of  Wesley  respecting  Calvin:  and  yet 
he  ventures  to  affirm,  that  the  doctrinal  views  of 
this  wise,  learned,  PIOUS,  sensible  man,  whose 
Commentaries,  by  the  confession  of  Arminius 
himself,  excel  (dl  others,  "  were  the  greatest 
hinderance  to  the  work  of  God."  Works,  vol.  3, 
p.  485.  We  can  have  no  difficulty  in  deciding 
ivhat  kind  of  a  work  was  so  much  hindered  by 
the  sentiments  entertained  by  Calvin,  particularly 
since  Arminius  has  told  us  that  those  sentiments 
were  the  result  of  an  "interpretation  of  the  sacred 
volume,"  which  was  "incomparable;"  of  an  "ex- 
position" of  the  Bible,  which  was  ^'•more  highly 
to  be  valued  than  all  others." 

3.  The  following  are  the  sentiments  of  distin- 
guished Episcopal  writers.  Philpot,  the  martyr, 
who  suffered  under  the  reign  of  Queen  Mary, 
calls  Calvin,  "that  godly  man,"  and  this  too  when 
under  the  examination  which  issued  in  his  death. 
Bishop  Jewel  speaks  of  Calvin  as  ^^so  worthy  an 
ornament  of  the  church  of  God."     Bishop  Hall, 


l28  THE    DIFFICULTIKS    Ot 

*'as  among  our  best  and  most  renowned  divines;^* 
and  Hooker  calls  him  "the  wisest  man  that  ever 
the  French  church  did  enjoy" — and  "a  vessel  of 
God's  glory."  Hooker  also  says  that  "his  Insti- 
tutes of  the  Christian  Religion,  and  his  Exposi- 
tions of  Holy  Scripture,  have  deservedly  procured 
him  honor  throughout  the  world.^*  Dr.  Hake- 
well,  chaplain  to  Charles  I.,  calls  Calvin  "an  ex- 
cellent instrument  of  God."  Dr.  Hoyl,  "  that 
great  instrument  of  God's  glory."  "His  works 
shall  praise  him  for  wit,  elegance,  fulness,  and 
soundness  of  divinity."  And  Bishop  Andrews 
speaks  of  him  as  "an  illustrious  person,  and  never 
to  be  mentioned  without  a  preface  of  the  highest 
honor."  This  evidence,  one  would  suppose, 
might  satisfy  our  Methodist  EPISCOPAL 
friends,  that  Calvin  was  not  such  a  monster  in 
human  shape,  as  they  would  persuade  the  com- 
munity. 

*'But  Calvin  burned  Servetus."  Well,  sup- 
pose he  did.  Has  not  the  Arminian  church  of 
Rome,  for  ages  past,  been  in  the  practice  of  shed- 
ding the  blood  of  the  saints,  wherever  she  had 
the  power?  See  your  own  grandmother  of  Rome, 
with  her  garments  dyed  in  blood!  And  what  will 
you  say  for  your  EPISCOPAIi  mother,  the 
church  of  England?  Look  at  the  rock  whence 
you  were  hewn,  the  hole  of  the  pit  whence  you 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  129 

were  digged,  and  say  no  more  about  Servetus.  It 
is  undeniable,  that  Archbishop  Cranmer  "pro- 
cured the  burning''  of  at  least  ybi^r  persons,  two 
of  whom  were  WOMEN.  He  was  concerned  in 
the  burning  of  John  Lambert,  and  Anne  Askew, 
for  those  very  principles  which  he  himself  after- 
wards embraced!  He  also  "procured  the  death" 
of  two  others,  persuading  the  king  to  sign  their 
death-warrants,  which  he  finally  did  with  tears 
in  his  eyes,  telling  Cranmer,  "he  must  answer  to 
God  for  it,  if  it  was  wrong."  The  crimes  of 
which  the)^  were  accused  were,  one  for  denying 
the  divinity,  the  other  the  humanity  of  Christ. 
(Miller's  Letters,  2d  Ed.  p.  419.)  This  ought  to 
suffice  "to  put  to  silence  the  ignorance  of  foolish 
men,"  and  to  quiet  their  ceaseless  prating  about 
Calvin  and  Servetus. 

But  it  is  by  no  means  admitted  that  the  death 
of  Servetus  can  be  justly  imputed  to  Calvin. 
Dr.  Miller  quotes  Sennebier,  who  was  no  Calvin- 
ist,  asserting  that  it  is  "a  cruel  calumny;"  that 
Calvin's  bitterest  foes,  who  were  contemporary 
with  him,  did  not  dare  to  advance  it.  "Calvin," 
he  says,  "was  anxious  to  prevent  his  death,  and 
warned  him  against  coming  to  Geneva,  as  he 
valued  his  life,  which  he  concluded  he  would  be 
deprived  of  by  the  laws  and  civil  government  of 
the  city."  Sennebier  also  says  that  after  the  sen- 
11* 


inO  THE    DIFFICULTIES    Of 

tonce  was  pronouncetl,  Calvin  labored  to  procure 
a  mitigation  of  it,  and  sincerely  deplored  his  fate. 
(Miller's  Letters,  p.  418.)  And  what  renders 
these  statements  more  probable  is,  that  Calvin 
himself,  commenting  on  Romans,  13:5,  observes 
that  "those  who  exercise  dominion  over  the  con- 
science, endeavor,  without  effect,  to  establish  by 
this  text  their  sacrilegious  /yranny.'" 

Nor  is  this  all.  If  it  could  be  proved  beyond 
the  possibility  of  controversy,  that  Calvin  was  the 
principal  agent  in  the  death  of  Servetus,  all  edu- 
cated men  know  that  it  must  have  been  not  so 
much  the  fault  of  the  man,  as  the  universal  de- 
lusion of  the  AGE  in  which  he  lived.  It  was  the 
twilight  of  the  Reformation  from  the  abominations 
of  Arminian  Popery;  and  liberty  of  conscience 
was  not  either  understood  or  admitted  by  any  de- 
nomination of  Christians.  Hence  Dr.  Miller  in- 
forms us,  that  the  mild  and  gentle  Melancthon, 
with  others  of  the  lights  of  the  age,  ajyproved  of 
the  death  of  Servetus.  So  also  did  the  EPIS- 
COPAL Cranmer.  And  Bishop  Hall  solemnly 
declared  that  in  that  matter  Calvin  DID  WELL 
APPROVE  HIMSELF  to  God's  church.  This 
also  was  the  opinion  of  the  great  body  of  the 
English  Reformers.  It  appears  to  have  been  a 
common  opinion  of  the  day,  that  blasphemy 
against  tli©  Ruler  of  the  universe,  like  some  sins 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  131 

under  the  Old  Testament  dispensation,  was  to  be 
punished  by  the  civil  magistrate  with  death. 
Servetus  himself  adopted  the  same  mistaken 
opinion. 

An  allusion  is  sometimes  made  to  the  compara- 
tive moral  tendency  of  the  Arminian  and  Calvin- 
istic  systems.  The  following  is  from  the  British 
Encyclopedia,  and  was  written  by  one  who  was 
710  Calvinist.  "There  is  one  remark  which  we 
think  ourselves  in  justice  bound  to  make.  It  is 
this — that  from  the  earliest  ages  down  to  our  own 
days,  if  we  consider  the  character  of  the  ancient 
Stoics,  the  Jewish  Essences,  the  modern  Calvin- 
is.ts,  and  Jansenists,  compared  with  tliat  of  their 
antagonists,  the  Epicureans,  the  Sadducees,  the 
Jlrminians,  and  the  Jesuits,  we  shall  find  that 
they  have  excelled,  in  no  small  degree,  in  the 
practice  of  the  most  rigid  and  respectable  virtues, 
and  have  been  the  HIGHEST  HONOR  to  their 
own  age,  and  the  BEST  MODELS  for  imitation 
to  every  succeeding  cige.^^  Such  is  the  testi- 
mony of  an  impartial  witness,  a  first-rate  scholar. 

Again:  The  Edinburgh  Review,  which  has  not 
been  suspected  of  a  leaning  toward  Calvinism, 
says,  "Who  were  the  first  formidable  opponents 
of  this  doctrine  (predestination)  in  the  church  of 
Rome?  The  Jesuits,  the  contrivers  of  courtly 
casuistry,   and    the  founders  of  lax   morality. 


132  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

Who,  in  the  same  cliurch,  inclined  to  the  theoloo-y 
of  Augustine?  The  Jansenists,  the  teachers  and 
the  MODELS  of  austere  morals." 

If  any  one  wishes  to  know  Wesley's  judgment 
respecting  the  character  of  the  people  whom  he 
srathcred  under  liis  care,  let  him  read  his  sermon 
on  tlie  'Causes  of  tlie  Inefficacy  of  Christianity,' 
particularly  the  Slh  section.  A  dark  picture, 
truly! 


ARMIXIAN'    MKTHODISM. 


133 


LETTER    l¥. 


Jltonp/nunf.  Universal  tSalvafion.  ''Falling 
from  Grace.^'  Regeneration.  Evidences 
and  Fruits. 

Rev.  Sir: 

The  subject  which  next  dcmnnds  our  attention, 
introduces  to  our  notice  Konic  of  the  worst 
features  of  the  Arminian  System. 

III.   The    Difficultif.s    of  JMKTiioDi'iM    im   co.vxectio.v 
WITH   THE  rtOCTiaiNE   OF  Atone-me.nt. 

Upon  the  importance  of  correct  views  in  refer- 
ence to  this  great  central  truth  of  the  Gospel,  we 
need  not  enlarge.  Error  here,  like  disease  of  the 
heart,  will  circulate  its  morbid  influence  through 
every  member  and  to  every  extremity  of  the  sys- 
tem. It  may,  therefore,  be  regarded  as  one  of  the 
most  exceptionable  traits  of  Methodism,  that  in 
her  20th  article,  she  is  fairly  chargeable  with  es- 
pousing the  cause  of  Universal  Salvation.  "The 
offering  of  Christ,  it  is  said,  is  that  perfect  re- 
demption, propitiation,  and  salisfaction/or  all  the 
sins  of  the  whole  tvorld,  both  original  and  actual." 
But  if  the  "whole  world"  was  embraced  in  the 


134  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

atonement,  so  that  there  was  a  ^^perfcct  satisfac- 
tion''' made  for  all  tlie  sins  of  all  mankind,  then 
must  the  Savior  have  died  for  all  the  sins  of  the 
wicked,  who  had  perished  from  earth,  and  were 
in  the  prison  of  despair,  at  the  period  of  the  cru- 
cifixion; which,  besides  the  palpable  absurdity  of 
t'  J  idea,  at  once  suggests  the  inquiry,  "why  then 
are  they  compelled  to  sufliir,  since  a  'perfect  re- 
demption and  satisfaction'  have  been  made  for 
them?" 

Again:  If  all  of  every  description  of  character 
have  a  "perfect  redemption,  propitiation,  and 
satisfaction,"  completed  for  them,  how  can  any 
be  lost?  Wesley  has  answered,  "Because  they 
believe  not  on  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God." 
But  is  this  unbelief,  this  rejection  of  Christ,  a  sin? 
If  not  a  sin,  it  can  do  them  no  harm  at  the  great 
day  of  decision.  "Nil  nisi  pcccatum  timeo."  But 
if  it  be  a  sin,  then  the  ailicle  declares  that  a  per- 
fect satisfaction  has  been  made  "for  all  the  sins  of 
the  whole  world,"  and  of  course  for  unbelief  as 
well  as  for  other  sin.  How  then  can  it  be  a  cause 
of  perdition?  If  it  be  just  to  punish  this  sin  with 
everlasting  torments,  after  a  "perfect  propitiation 
and  satisfaction"  have  been  made  for  it,  it  will  be 
equally  just  and  right  to  punish  all  bin  for  which 
Christ  died.  Both  law  and  justice,  then,  will 
tak-e  the  redeemed  sinner  by  the  throat  at  the  day 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  135 

of  judgment,  and  each  urge  its  demand,  "pay  me 
what  thou  owest,*'  as  inexorably  as  though  no 
Savior  had  ever  suffered  and  died  for  his  salva- 
tion. Who  then  can  be  saved?  Here  then  is  the 
dilemma:  If  unbelief  be  not  a  sin,  it  cannot  be  a 
cause  of  future  misery — it  can  do  the  sinner  no 
harm.  If  unbelief  be  a  sin,  a  '•'"perfect  salisfaC' 
tiori'^  is  made  for  it,  as  for  all  sin,  and  still  it  can 
do  the  sinner  no  harm;  unless  a  sin,  for  which  a 
perfect  satisfaction  is  made  and  the  whole  debt 
paid,  can  be  again  called  up  for  satisfaction  and 
the  debt  again  exacted.  In  the  former  case,  no 
one  can  be  lost;  in  the  latter,  no  one  can  be  saved. 
The  doctrine  of  a  "perfect  satisfaction"  for  all  the 
sins  of  the  whole  world,  must  land  us  either  in 
Universal  Salvation,  or  Universal  Perdition.  But 
if  Methodism  still  affirm  that  unbelief  is  a  sin, 
and  the  cause  of  the  perdition  of  the  soul,  we 
again  ask,  how  can  it  be  a  ground  of  righteous 
condemnation?  The  article  declares  that  all  sin 
is  atoned  for  by  a  '•'•perfect  satisfaction.^''  How 
then  can  the  law  condemn,  when  its  penalty  is 
perfectly  paid?  How  can  justice  hold  the  crimi- 
nal bound,  after  he  has  been  perfectly  redeemed? 
How  can  the  judge  pronounce  sentence  when  he 
has  been  perfectly  satisfied?  Most  manifestly, 
therefore,  this  article,  when  interpreted  on  Meth- 
odist principles,  teaches  the  doctrine  of  the  salva- 


136  THE    DIITICULTIES    OF 

tionof  all,  without  exception;  and  any  attempt  to 
escape  the  difficulty  will  only  lead  to  the  opposite 
and  equally  absurd  extreme  of  the  final  and  hope- 
less ruin  of  the  whole  family  of  mankind. 

The  Arminian  scheme  is  therefore  totally  at 
"variance  with  the  very  nature  of  the  Savior's 
work.  It  is  an  atonement;  that  is,  a  reconcilia- 
tion; and  to  talk  of  his  making  an  atonement  for 
such  as  are  never  reconciled,  is  a  contradiction  in 
terms;  it  is  to  say  he  makes  atonement,  (AT 
ONE-ment,  as  the  word  is;  makes  God  and  man 
at  one,)  and  yet  makes  no  atonement,  in  the  case 
of  the  same  individuals.  He  is  said  to  give  satis- 
faction for  sin;  but  how  can  he  have  given  satis- 
faction for  the  sins  of  those  on  whom  the  law  is  to 
take  satisfaction  eternally?  He  is  said  to  appease 
divine  justice;  but  can  the  justice  of  God  be  ap- 
peased in  the  case  of  those  against  whom  its 
flaming  sword  shall  awake  forever? — to  expiate 
our  offences;  but  how  can  those  sins  for  which 
the  guilty  perpetrators  are  to  suffer  everlastingly, 
have  been  expiated? — to  redeem  from  the  curse 
of  the  law;  but  how  can  those  who  are  to  be  kept 
in  eternal  thraldom,  have  redemption  through  his 
blood? — to  propitiate  tlie  wrath  of  God;  but  how 
can  those  be  interested  in  his  propitiation  who  are 
the  objects  of  Jehovah's  unceasing  displeasure? 
It  supposes  him  to  be  the  Savior  of  those  who  are 


AHMINIAN    METHODISM.  18? 

never  saved,  the  Redeemer  of  those  who  are  never 
redeemed,  the  Deliverer  of  thousands  who  are 
never  delivered,  but  remain  under  eternal  con- 
<lemnation."  (Symington.)  To  say  that,  al- 
though made  for  all,  it  does  not  save  some,  be- 
cause they  do  not  believe,  is  to  overlook  the  fact 
that  thousands  have  never  heard  the  Gospel;  and 
^'how  shall  they  believe  in  Him  of  whom  they 
have  not  heard?^' — and  "how  shall  they  call  on 
him  in  whom  they  have  not  believed?" — and  how 
shall  they  be  saved,  if  "they  call  not  on  the  name 
of  the  Lord?"  (Rom.  10  :13, 14.)  The  argument 
is  from  the  pen  of  inspiration.  "Let  God  be 
true." 

Further:  The  scheme  we  oppose,  cannot  be 
supported  by  its  ablest  advocates,  without  array- 
ing the  designs  and  purposes  of  God  against  each 
other.  The  Arminian  believes  that  the  blood  of 
the  Sacrifice  was  shed  with  the  desigii  on  the 
part  of  God,  to  save  all  mankind.  But  Watson 
affirms  expressly,  that  "what  the  creature  will  do, 
is  known  beforehand  with  a  perfect  prescience;'* 
"and  what  God  HAS  DETERMINED  TO 
DO  in  consequence,  is  knoivn  and  PURPOSED 
from  eternity  in  view  of  the  actual  circumstances," 
Well,  if  Christ  perfectly  and  infallibly  kneiv  those 
who  would  continue  in  sin  and  perish,  and  had 

''PURPOSED  from  ^t^rnity"  to  destroy  them, 
12 


188  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

is  it  reasonable  to  suppose  he  died  with  a  design 
or  pmyose  to  save  them?  In  other  words,  that 
he  died  with  a  purpose  to  save  the  very  persons 
whom  he  had  before  purposed  to  destroy!!  And 
yet  "Watson  strongly  objects  to  "the  Calvinistic 
opinion,"  because  it  implies  that  God  ^^never  in- 
tended^^  to  save  a  sinner  whom  ^^from  eternity^^ 
he  had  ^^purposed^^  or  intended  to  destroy!! 

The  question  of  the  Extent  of  the  Atonement 
is  not  fairly  stated  by  Watson — "Whether  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  did  so  die  for  all  men,  as  to 
make  salvation  attainable  by  all?"  (vol.  2,  p.  285.) 
We  maintain  the  infinite  intrinsic  value  of  Christ's 
finished  work;  and  if  this  w^riter  mean  that  with 
the  light,  teaching,  and  special  influences  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  salvation  is  attainable  by  all  at  some 
period  during  their  natural  life,  (not  attainable 
when  Christ  died,  and  thousands  were  already  in 
the  prison  of  despair,)  we  have  no  controversy 
with  him;  but  if  he  mean,  attainable  without  the 
special  aid  of  the  Spirit,  this  is  true  of  no  one,  un- 
less it  be  true  that  sain .3  beget  themselves  unto  a 
lively  hope,  instead  of  being  "begotten  of  God." 
The  true  hinge  of  the  controversy  is  the  design 
of  God  in  sending  his  Son  into  the  world,  and  the 
intention  of  Christ  in  expiring  on  the  cross.*    If 

*  "Non  quseritur,"  says  Turretine,  "de  pretio  et  tuffi. 
tientia  mortis  Christi.    Sed  agitur  da  destinatione  Dei 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  130 

the  design  and  intention  were  to  save  all,  while 
many  are  not  saved,  the  plan  of  the  great  God 
has  been  entirely  frustrated,  and  He  has  been  dis- 
concerted and  disappointed.  Besides,  if  this  has 
occurred  in  this  life,  under  the  mediatorial  reign 
of  the  Son  of  God,  what  certainty  can  there  be 
that  it  will  not  occur  in  the  future  world?  God 
indeed  designs  that  saints  shall  be  forever  holy 
and  happy;  and  on  the  strength  of  his  intentioiii 
has  promised  them  an  eternal  inheritance.  But 
if  his  plan  has  once  met  with  defeat  and  disap- 
pointment, what  assurance  can  we  have  that  it 
will  not  be  so  again?  It  may  be  replied,  that 
God's  infallible  foreknowledge  proves  it  certain 
that  his  promise  will  not  fail.  But,  on  the  Ar- 
minian  scheme,  if  the  designs  and  plans  of  Deity 
are  defeated,  and  fail,  why  may  not  also  his  fore- 
knowledge? Besides,  God's  infallible  foreknow- 
ledge demonstrates  the  absurdity  of  the  idea,  that 
his  designs  ever  do  fail.  What  can  be  more  de- 
rogatory to  the  character  of  "the  only  wise  God,'* 
than  to  suppose  him  to  form  designs  and  plans, 
and  employ  means  for  their  execution,  while  he  is 
infallibly  certain  that  they  will  be  utterly  frus- 
trated and  defeated!  For  example,  he  designs  to 
save  a  sinner,  whom  he  infallibly  knows  will  die 

mittentis  filium  in  mnndum,  et  de  inteniione  Christi 
morientis,"     Loo.  Dec.  Quart.  Quoestio  XIV. 


140  Tins  DiFFieuLTres  or 

in  sin,  and  whom  he  designs,  in  consequence  of 
his  sin,  to  punish  forever!  Still  he  designs  to 
save  him,  and  employs  large  and  expensive  means 
to  secure  the  very  result  which  he  designs  shall 
never  be  secured.  Dr.  Clarke's  is  the  best 
remedy  here — viz.,  to  suppose  that  God  does  not 
cJiGose  to  know  certain  events,  when  such  know- 
ledge is  rather  inconvenient  to  a  favorite  theory! 
Carrying  with  us  these  principles  of  common 
sense,  let  us  appeal  to  the  inspired  Oracles. 
There  we  discover  ilie  DESIGN  of  the  Atone- 
ment revealed  in  such  terms  as  the  following: 
*^Chvist  loved  (he  CHURCH  and  gave  JiimseJf 
for  IT,  tliat  he  ynight  sanrtify  and  cleanse  it — 
that  he  might  present  to  hmiself  <!  glorious 
church,  not  having  spot  or  wrinhlc,  but  that  it 
should  be  holy  and  toi'houl  blemish.''  (Eph.  5: 
25,  28.)  Again  it  is,  "that  He  MIGHT  redeem 
lis  from  all  iniquity,  and  purify  unto  liimself  a 
peculiar  people,  zealous  of  good  works."  (Titus 
2:14.)  A'lain,  *'That  we  might  I  AYE  through 
him.''  (1  John  4:9.)  Again,  "He  suffered  the 
just  for  the  unjust,  that  He  I\HGKT  bring  us  to 
God."  (1  Pet.  3:18.)  Again,  "He  was  made 
SIN  for  us,  li  at  we  might  be  made  the  righteous- 
ness of  God  in  Him."  (2  Cor.  5:21.)  Again, 
*'He  bare  our  sins  in  his  own  body,  that  we  being 
d^ad  to  sins,  should  live  imfo  righteousness." 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  141 

(1  Pet.  2:24.)  And  even  when  God  is  said  to 
have  "SO  loved  the  WORLD,"  it  is,  that  "WHO- 
SOEVER BELIEVETH  on  Him,  should  not 
perish."  In  all  these  passages,  with  many  more 
that  might  be  adduced,  there  is  connected  with 
the  atonement,  a  special  design  of  mercy,  which 
can  in  no  way  be  supposed  to  pertain  to  thoso 
who  shall  finally  perish.  For  example,  did  the 
Savior  DESIGN  "to  sanctify  and  cleanse" — "to 
present  without  spot  or  wrinkle,"  "holy  and 
without  blemish" — "to  redeem  from  all  iniquity, 
that  they  might  live" — "to  bring  to  God" — and 
"make  the  righteousness  of  God  in  Him" — did 
he  design  these  infinite  favors  for  those,  who  he 
"knew  beforehand  with  a  perfect  prescience," 
would  live  and  die  in  sin,  and  whom  he  had 
"PURPOSED  from  eternity  in  view  of  the  actual 
circumstances,"  to  destroy^  as  Watson  himself  is 
compelled  to  admit?  Surely  no  unprejudiced  per- 
son can  suppose  that  the  design  of  the  Redeem- 
er's death  was  to  save  these  unhappy  ones,  equally 
with  those  who  are  purified  from  sin,  and  crown- 
ed with  glory,  honor,  and  immortality. 

The  limitation  is  even  more  strikingly  brought 
into  view  in  the  following  passages:  "For  the 
transgression  of  my  PEOPLE  was  he  stricken." 
«*By  his  knowledge  shall  my  righteous  servant 
justify  MANY;  for  he  shall  bear  their  iniqui' 
12* 


142  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

ties.'^  (Is.  53 :  8,  11.)  "I  lay  down  my  life  for 
the  SHEEP."  (John  10  :15.)  "I  pray  for  them; 
I  pray  not  for  the  worlds  but  for  them  which 
thou  hast  GIVEN  me."  (John  17:  9.)  Can  any 
reasonable  person  hnagine  that  these  texts  are 
consistent  with  the  supposition  that  Christ  'pray- 
ed,' 'was  stricken,'  'bore  the  iniquities,'  and  'laid 
down  his  life,'  equally  for  all  mankind?  On  the 
principles  of  the  Arminian,  Christ's  love  in  giving 
himself  for  his  people,  his  church,  which  is  com- 
pared to  the  peculiar  special  affection  of  the  hus- 
band for  his  spouse,  means  after  all,  nothing  more 
than  the  universal  good  will  or  compassion  which 
he  entertained  equally  for  all  others.  Can  this 
be  true?  He  "shall  JUSTIFY  many."  Why? 
Because  "he  shall  bear  their  iniquities."  But  if 
he  bore  the  iniquities  of  all,  he  will  justify  all. 
He  is  the  GOOD  SHEPHERD.  What  is  the 
proof?  He  lays  "down  his  life  for  the  slieepy 
But  if  he  laid  down  his  life  equally  for  those  who 
never  were,  nor  ever  will  be  his  sheep,  what  be- 
comes of  the  proof  of  his  peculiar  care  and  kind- 
ness as  the  good  Shepherd?  Or  will  it  be  said, 
his  sheep  mean  ail  mankind?  The  Shepherd 
will  himself  give  a  different  decision  'at  that  day.* 
He  prays  for  them,  but  '■not  for  the  ivorld.*  For 
whom?  For  those  whom  God  had  given  him? 
For  what  purpose?    "That  he  should  give  eternal 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  143 

life  to  AS  MANY  as  tliou  hast  given  Him." 
(John  17:  2.)  They  were  not  of  the  world.  But 
were  there  not  others  for  whom  He  prayed? 
"Neither  pray  Ifor  these  aloiie,  but  for  them  also 
which  SHALL  BELIEVE  on  me  through  their 
word."  (John  17:20.)  And  what  is  the  burden 
of  his  prayer?  "That  they  also  whom  thou  hast 
given  me,  be  with  me  ivhere  I  am.''''  The  Ar- 
minian  believes  that  Christ  died  for  all,  though  he 
prays  or  intercedes  only  for  some.  He  gives  his 
life  for  them,  but  will  not  give  his  prayers!  Or 
if,  in  express  contradiction  of  the  Savior,  he  as- 
serts that  he  prays  for  the  world,  or  all  mankind, 
then  he  must  believe  that  his  prayer  does  not  pre- 
vail, in  many  instances,  that  they  "may  be  with 
him  where  he  is" — though  He  himself  has  said, 
"I  know  that  thou  hearest  me  always.''^ 

Another  part  of  the  all-prevalent  intercession  of 
Christ  is,  to  secure  the  gift  of  the  Comforter,  that 
he  may  "abide  with  his  people  for  ever."  (John 
14 :16.)  To  his  success  in  procuring  this  best  of 
all  gifts,  the  apostle  alludes,  (Gal.  4:4,  6.)  "God 
sent  forth  his  Son  to  redeem,  them  that  were  un- 
der the  law,  that  we  MIGHT  receive  the  adoption 
of  sons."  "And  because  ye  are  sons,  God  hath 
sent  forth  the  Spirit  of  his  Son  into  your  hearts." 
The  Arminian  doctrine  requires  us  to  believe  that 
Christ  hath  redeemed  thousands,  with  whom  the 


144  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

Comforter  does  not  abide;  who  disappoint  and 
frustrate  his  design  that  they  should  receive  the 
adoption  of  sons.  He  is  unable  to  conquer  their 
reluctance,  and  make  them  "willing  in  the  day  of 
his  power."  Thus  the  eflbrts  of  the  persons  of 
the  adorable  Godhead  are  represented  as  crossing 
each  other;  and. thousands  are  redeemed  by  Christ 
who  are  never  born  of  the  Spirit,  but  continue 
under  the  bondage  of  corruption,  and  lie  down  in 
everlasting  sorrow.  But  if  this  be  possible,  what 
reason  can  be  given  why  the  death  of  Christ 
might  not  have  been  utterly  and  for  ever  unavail- 
ing, with  respect  to  the  whole  human  race?  If 
one  sinner  may  defeat  the  plans  and  frustrate  the 
efforts  of  the  Savior,  others  may  do  the  same.  So 
that  the  success  of  the  scheme  of  mercy,  the  ful- 
filment of  the  promise  that  Christ  should  "see  of 
the  travail  of  his  soul  and  be  satisfied,"  was  sus- 
pended upon  the  concurrence  of  the  creature  with 
the  designs  of  the  infinite  God,  and  but  for  that 
concurrence,  (which  might  have  been  withheld,) 
must  have  been  for  ever  impossible.  Besides,  so 
far  is  it  from  being  true  that  all  are  redeemed^ 
that  it  is  the  song  of  the  ransomed  in  Heaven — 
*»Thou  hast  redeemed  us  to  God  OUT  OF  every 
kindred,  and  tongue,  and  people,  and  nation." 
(Rev.  5:9.)  If  it  be  inquired,  why  is  the  atone- 
ment made  effectual  for  only  a  part  of  the  race  of 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM,  145 

mankind? — we  inquire  in  turn,  why  was  it  pro- 
vided for  any?  why  provided  for  man,  and  not  for 
the  angels  who  kept  not  their  first  fj^tate?  "Why 
is  the  way  of  one  man  hedged  up  wi;h  a  thousand 
means  and  influences  to  turn  his  feet  into  the  path 
of  peace,  v/hile  another  is  beset  with  almost  every 
form  of  allurement  to  vice  and  ruin?  "Why  is  it,'* 
to  employ  the  lan2;uage  of  W^atson,  "that  men  are 
sometimes  IRRESISTIBLY  awakened  to  a  sense 
of  their  guilt  and  danger  by  the  Spirit  of  God" — 
"and  sometimes  independent  of  any  external 
means  at  all" — (vol.  2,  p.  447) — while  others,  in 
the  use  of  all  the  ordinary  means,  remain  insensi- 
ble to  the  last?  Wliy  did  the  Savior  give  thanks 
that  these  things  were  hid  from  the  wise  and  pru- 
dent, from  the  self-righteous,  and  the  formalist, 
while  publicans  and  harlots  go  into  the  kingdom 
of  grace  and  glory?  "Even  so,  Father,  for  so  it 
seemed  good  in  thy  sight." 

An  attempt  has  been  made  to  turn  the  edge  of 
the  reasoning  employed  in  the  foregoing  para- 
graphs, thus:  "The  question  to  be  determined  is. 
Was  the  atonement  general  or  particular?  If 
general,  then  Christ  died  for  those  ivho  were  in 
hell  when  he  teas  crvcifiedy  Desperate  indeed 
must  be  the  cause,  that  demands  the  defence  of 
such  a  position!  If  Christ  died  for  men  in  hell, 
then  it  was  to  save  them,  or  it  was  not.    If  not  to 


140  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

save  them,  for  what  purpose  did  he  die  for  them? 
The  only  imaginable  influence  his  death  could 
exert  upon  the  finally  lost,  was  to  add  to  their 
torments,  by  charging  the  blood  of  the  Son  of 
God  upon  them.  Was  this  the  object  of  his  dying 
for  them?  But  if  you  assert  he  died  to  save 
them,  you  charge  the  "only  wise  God"  with  the 
folly  of  attempting,  (at  the  infinite  expense  of  his 
own  dear  Son,)  to  save  those  whom  he  had  al- 
ready doomed  to  eternal  torments,  and  whom  it 
was  impossible  to  save,  because  He  had  deter- 
mined them  to  be  forever  lost!  Such  are  some 
of  the  hopeful  fruits  of  the  dogma,  which  asserts 
the  design  of  the  Redeemer's  death  to  have  been 
to  save  all,  as  much  Cain  and  Judas,  as  John  and 
Paul;  as  much  those  who  were  in  hell,  as  those 
who  inherit  heaven.  If  to  have  the  wisest,  and 
best,  and  most  merciful  designs  thwarted,  and  the 
kindest  intentions  and  purposes  disappointed  of 
their  execution  by  wicked  creatures,  can  produce 
vexation  and  chagrin,  the  blessed  Redeemer,  on 
Methodist  principles,  must  be  infinitely  mortified 
and  miserable. 

Again  it  has  been  said,  in  reply,  that  "although 
a  ^perfect  satisfaction^  was  ofiered  for  all  men, 
yet  it  ivas  not  accepted  for  their  actual  sins,  (in 
which  is  included  unbelief,)  until  men  comply 
with  the  Gospel  conditions."    What  a  degrading 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM,  147 

view  of  the  glorious  work  of  redemption  is  this! 
The  blessed  Jesus  came  into  this  world  of  guilt, 
lived  a  life  of  sorrows,  and  died  a  death  of  infamy, 
"to  finish  the  work"  his  Father  had  given  him 
to  do  for  the  salvation  of  men.  *'It  is  finished," 
he  cried  upon  the  cross,  and  gave  up  the  ghost. 
The  work  was  completed;  a  "perfect  redemption, 
propitiation,  and  satisfaction,"  were  made  for  lost 
sinners.  But  after  all  these  sufferings,  and  sor- 
rows, and  groans,  and  tears,  and  blood,  it  avail- 
eth  nothing;  "it  is  not  accepted."  Why?  Be- 
cause men  do  not  repent  and  believe!!  He  hath 
magnified  the  law  and  made  it  honorable;  he  hath 
quenched  the  flaming  sword  of  justice  in  his  own 
heart's  blood;  "God  is  well  pleased  for  His  right- 
eousness sake ;"  He  is  exalted  a  Prince  and  a 
Savior  to  give  repentance  to  Israel  and  remission 
of  sins;  and  \hd.i  faith  which  is  the  gift  of  God, 
is  also  a  blessed  fruit  produced  by  his  death  and 
inwrought  by  his  Spirit — but  all  in  vain — "i7  is 
not  accepted^  Is  this  the  scheme  of  salvation 
revealed  in  the  Scriptures,  as  the  theme  of  glad 
hosannas  around  the  eternal  throne?  Did  he  so 
understand  it,  who  said,  "If  when  we  were  ene- 
mies, we  were  reconciled  to  C4od  by  the  death  of 
his  Son,  MUCH  MORE  being  reconciled,  we 
shall  be  saved  by  his  life.  He  that  spared  not 
hi«  own  Son,  but  freely  gave  him  up  for  us  all, 


148  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

how  shall  he  not  with  him  freely  give  us  all 
things?^^  Did  He  so  understand  it,  who  said, 
*'I  lay  down  my  life  for  my  sheep,  and  they  shall 
never  perish^  neither  shall  any  pluck  them  out  of 
my  hand."  Do  these  passages  teach  an  atone- 
ment offered,  but  not  accepted!  Shall  sinful  man 
venture  to  reverse  ihese  promises  of  Almighty 
God,  and  affirm,  "Christ  lays  down  his  life  for 
his  sheep,"  (or  all  mankind,)  and  thousands  of 
them  do  perish,  and  are  plucked  out  of  his  hand? 
He  that  spared  not  his  own  Son,  but  freely  gave 
him  up  for  us  all,  will  not  with  him  freely  give  us 
all  things — will  not  grant  us  faith  and  repentance, 
the  gifts  of  his  Spirit,  through  the  blood  of  atone- 
ment. Shall  a  sinner,  redeemed  by  the  omnipo- 
tent arm  of  Jehovah,  be  a  bond-slave  of  Satan  for 
ever?  Shall  e  bestow  tho  highest  blessing  at 
his  disposal,  and  deny  a  minor  benefit?  Shall 
He  perform  the  greater,  but  refuse  the  less?  All 
the  perfections  of  the  ever  blessed  God  conspire 
to  answer.  No! 

Intimately  connected  with  the  unscriptural 
views  of  atonement,  just  exposed,  is  the  strange 
fancy  of  "falling  from  grace."  The  soul  may  be 
formed  in  the  image  of  Christ,  a  new  creature, 
and  become  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  She 
may  be  interested  in  the  "perfect  redemption  and 
satisfaction'*  made  for  all  her  sins.     She  may  ba 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  140 

justified  before  the  righteous  Judge,  and  have  all 
her  transgressions  blotted  out  through  the  tender 
compassions  of  the  covenant  keeping  God.     Jus- 
tice may  be  satisfied,  the  law  honored  and  mag- 
nified, and  the  new-born  spirit  placed  under  the 
care  of  the  Great  Shepherd,  who  ransomed  her 
with  his  blood,  whose  love  is  immutable,  as  his 
power  is  infinite.    But  all  in  vain.    To-day,  the 
soul  is  embraced  in  the  arms  of  an  Almighty 
Savior,  bears  his  image,  and  is  sealed  with  his 
blood — to-morrow,  she  is  the  victim  of  malicious 
fiends,  exulting  over  her  agonies  amid  the  horrors 
of  eternal  wo.    Yesterday,  all  her  sins  were  for- 
given, through  a  "perfect  propitiation  and  satis- 
faction"— to-day,  all  her  sins  are  charged  to  her 
account;  Christ's  perfect  atonement  avails  not; 
but  the  dread  penalty  of  the  violated  law  is  poured 
upon  her  devoted  head.    Yesterday,  the  soul  was 
one  of  Christ's    sheep,  of  whom  he   has  said, 
*Hhey  shall  never  perish — I  know  them,  and  they 
follow  ??2e" — to-day,  it  is  one  of  those  to  whom 
he  says,  ^^Departye  cursed,  1  never  knew  you ^ 
Yesterday,  she  was  acquitted  and  accepted  as  of 
the  number  of  the  *'good,  whose  steps  are  ordered 
by  the  Lord;  who,  though  they  fall,  shall  not  he 
utterly  cast  down,  for  the  Lord  upholdeth  them 
with  his  hand,"  (Psl.  37:23,  24)— to-day,  she  is 
13 


150  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

found  guilty,  rejected  as  vile,  and  falls  to  rise  no 
more ! 

It  cannot  have  escaped  the  notice  of  the  atten- 
tive reader,  that  one  of  the  greatest  difficulties  of 
the  Arminian  scheme  is  to  bend  the  Scriptures  to 
testify  in  its  favor.  Hence  it  is  not  surprising 
that  Wesley  thought  it  needful  to  give  his  fol- 
lowers a  new  translation*  of  the  New  Testament; 
and  it  is  deeply  to  be  regretted  that  in  this  respect 
modern  Methodists  should  lend  their  countenance 
to  Socinians,  Universalists,  and  the  followers  of 
Alexander  Campbell.  The  necessity  of  convert- 
ing the  Bible  to  the  Arminian  faith  is  sensibly 
felt  in  reference  to  the  subject  now  before  us.  To 
prove  this,  we  will  place  in  parallel  columns  a 
few  of  the  decided  declarations  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
contrasted  w'lih.  the  interpretation  necessary  to.be 
given  in  order  to  enlist  them  in  support  of  Ar- 
minianism. 

The  Bible. 


I  will  put  my  fear  in  their 
hearts,  that  they  shall  not 
depart  from  me.  Jer.  31:40. 

The  righteous  shall  hold 
on  his  way,  (Job  17:9)— shall 


Methodist  Interpreta- 
tion. 
I  will  put  my  fear  in  their 
hearts,  but  many  of  them 
shall  depart  from  me   with 
an  everlasting  backsliding. 
Many  righteous  shall  turn 
aside  from  their  way,  and 


*  Dr.  A.  Clarke,  however,  the  most  learned  of  all  the 
Methodists,  says  of  the  commou  translation,  "The 
original  is  alone  superior  to  it." 


ARMINIAN    laETHODlSM. 


151 


never  be  removed.  (Prov. 
10:30.)  Being  confident  of 
this  very  thing,  that  he 
which  hath  begun  a  good 
work  in  you,  will  perform 
it  until  the  day  of  Jesus 
Christ.    Phil.  1:6. 


The  path  of  the  just  is  as 
the  shining  light,  which 
shineth  more  and  more  un- 
to the  perfect  day.  Prov. 
4:18. 

Father,  I  thank  thee  that 
thou  hast  heard  me;  and  I 
know  that  thou  hearest  me 
always.    John  11:  41,  42. 

He  that  heareth  my  word 
and  believeth  on  him  that 
sent  me,  hath  everlasting 
life,  and  shall  not  come  into 
condemnation.   John  5:34. 

If  any  man  eat  of  this 
bread,  he  shall  live  for  ever. 
John  6:5!. 

The  Lord  loveth  judg- 
ment, and  forsaketh  not  his 
saints :  they  are  preserved 
for  ever.   Psl.  37: 28. 

Whosoever  is  born  of 
God  doth  not  commit  sin, 
for  his  seed  remaineth  in 
him,  and  he  cannot  sin,  be- 
cause he  is  born  of  God. 
1  John  3:9. 

Whom  he  justified,  them 
he  also  glorified.  Rom.  8 : 
30. 


shall  be  removed  for  ever. 
Having  no  confidence  at 
all  that  the  good  work  of 
grace  will  be  performed  in 
you  by  Him  who  hath  be- 
gun it,  unless  you  improve, 
and  are  faithful;  that  is, 
unless  you  perform  the  work 
yourselves. 

The  path  of  the  just  is 
oftentimes  as  the  departing 
light,  which  shineth  less  and 
less  unto  the  blackness  of 
darkness  for  ever. 

Father,  I  thank  thee  that 
thou  hast  heard  me ;  and  I 
know  that  tho7x  hearest  me 
sometimes. 

Many  that  hear  my  word 
and  believe  on  him  that  sent 
me,  will  fail  of  everlasting 
life,  and  shall  come  into 
everlasting  condemnation. 

Some  who  eat  of  this 
bread,  shall  perish  for  ever. 

The  Lord  loveth  judg- 
ment,  and  forsaketh  his 
saints,  and  sorne  of  them 
are  lost  for  ever. 

Persons  who  are  born  of 
God  do  commit  sin,  and  be- 
come the  seed  of  the  ser- 
pent. They  can  commit 
the  sin  of  final  apostacy. 

Some  whom  God  has  jus- 
tified and  pardoned,  he  will 
condemn    and    punish    for 


152 


THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 


Who  shall  lay  any  thing 
to  the  charg'e  of  God's  elect? 
It  is  God  that  justifieth — 
\vho  is  he  tliat  condemneth? 
Rom.  8  :  33,  34. 


Elect — who  are  kept  by 
the  pov;er  of  God  through 
faith  unto  salvation.  1  Pet. 
1:2,5. 


False  Christs  and  false 
prophets  shall  rise,  and  shall 
show  signs  and  wondert;,  to 
seduce,  if  it  were  poasihle, 
even  the  elect.  Mark  13:22. 


There  is  joy  in  the  pre- 
sence of  the  angels  of  God 
over  one  sinner  that  repent- 
eth.  Luke  15:10. 


Let  him  know  that  he 
which  converteth  the  sin- 
ner from  the  error  of  his 
ways,  shall  save  a  soul 
from  death.    Jas.  5:20. 

They  went  out  from  us, 
but  they  were  not  of  us;  for 
if  they  had  been  of  us,  they 
would    no    doubt    HAVE 


Christ,  "ir^o  makes  con. 
tinual  intercession'^  for  his 
people,  will  lay  their  sins  to 
the  charge  of  those  who 
were  his  elect — will  con- 
demn  those  whom  he  justi- 
fied^ and  pronounce  his 
curse  on  those  for  whom  he 
prayed. 

Though  "kept  bj  the 
power  of  God,"  man}'  once 
elect  persons  shall  be  be- 
trayed by  the  power  of  Sa- 
tan,  through  unbelief,  into 
eterufil  perdition. 

"We  have  proved  from 
Scripture,  that  the  number 
of  the  elect  may  he  dimin- 
ished.''''* And  it  is  not  only 
'■'■possihW''  that  tlic  elect 
may  lie  '■'■seduced,''''  but  cer- 
tain  that  they  will  be. 

The  joy  of  angels  over 
the  repenting  sinner  is  pre- 
mature;  and  if  they  are  ca- 
pable of  sorrow,  must  often 
be  exchanged  for  mourning, 
when  the  same  sinner  is 
cast  down  to  hell. 

Let  him  knoxo  that  though 
he  may  convert  the  sinner 
from  the  error  of  his  ways, 
he  oftentimes  shall  NOT 
save  his  soul  from  death. 

The  apostle  does  not 
"  speak  properly."  Many 
who  '■'■icere  of  zis"  have  not 
^^  continued    with    us,"  but 


These  are  the  words  of  Watson — Vol.  2,  p.  340, 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  153 


have    gone    to   return    no 
more. 

"God  did  break  the  cove- 
nant of  his  servant."  "He 
did  alter  the  thing  that  had 
g-one  out  of  his  lips."  "God 
did  also  fail  David.''''* 


CONTINUED   WITH    US. 
IJohn  2:  li). 

My  covenant  w^ill  I  not 
break,  nor  alter  the  thing- 
that  has  gone  out  of  my 
mouth.  Once  have  I  sv\-orn 
by  my  holiness  that  I  will 
not  lie  unto  David.  Psl. 8J: 
34,  35. 

This  contrast  of  Arminian  error  and  inspired 
truth  might  be  extended  to  a  very  great  length. 
But  we  forbear.  It  may  be  proper,  however, 
briefly  to  notice  the  method  by  which  these  and 
other  texts  are  evaded.  As  for  example,  when 
Paul  inquires,  "Wlio  shall  separate  us  from  the 
love  of  Christ?"  and  adds  his  persuasion  that 
neither  death  nor  life,  &:c.  should  be  able  to  sepa- 
rate us  from  his  love.  The  Arminian  adds,  Very 
true,  if  Christians  hold  fast  their  integrity.  In 
other  words,  if  they  persevere,  they  will  perse- 
vere! "My  sheep  sliall  never  perish,  neither 
shall  any  pluck  them  out  of  my  hand" — that  is, 
replies  the  Arminian,  if  they  remain  Christ's 
sheep.  In  other  words,  the  promise  is,  "If  they 
remain  his  sheep,  they  shall  remain  his  sheep!" 
"I  will  put  my  fear  in  their  hearts,  that  they 
shall  not  depart  from  me;"  that  is,  if  they  do  not 
depart  from  God,  they  shall  not  depart!     "The 

•  These  are  the  identical  words  of  Wesley.     To  what 
daring  extremes  will  not  Error  drive  her  devotees! 
13* 


154  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

righteous  shall  hold  on  his  way;"  i.  e.,  if  he  does 
hold  on  his  way!  "The  steps  of  a  good  man  are 
ordered  by  the  Lord:  though  he  fall,  he  shall  not 
be  utterly  cast  down,  for  the  Lord  upholdeth  him 
with  his  hand."  That  is,  if  he  continues  to  be  a 
good  man,  he  shall  not  be  utterly  cast  down.  In 
other  words,  if  he  do  not  fall,  or  falling,  riseth 
up  again,  he  shall  not  remain  cast  down.'  And 
if  he  hold  himself  uip,  the  Lord  will  uphold  him 
with  his  hand!  According  to  Methodist  interpre- 
tation, these  consolatory  passages,  which  have 
filled  the  Christian's  bosom  a  thousand  times  with 
unutterable  joy,  are  nothing  more  than  identical 
propositions.  "If  such  an  event  take  place,  it 
will  take  place! T^ 

It  need  scarcely  be  said  that  such  views  of  the 
perfection  and  efficacy  of  Christ's  'finished  work,' 
are  no  less  dishonorable  to  God,  than  dangerous 
and  discouraging  to  men.  "If  I  could  believe 
these  things,''^  says  the  venerable  Dr.  Miller,  "I 
must  consider  the  character  of  God  as  dishonored; 
his  counsels  as  degraded  to  a  chaos  of  wishes  and 
endeavors;  his  promises  as  the  fallible  and  uncer- 
tain declarations  of  circumscribed  knowledge  and 
endless  doubt;  the  best  hopes  of  the  Christian  as 
liable  every  hour  to  be  blasted;  and  the  whole 
plan  of  salvation  as  nothing  better  than  a  gloomy 
system    of   possibilities   and  peradventurcs ;    a 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  153 

system,  on  the  whole,  nearly,  if  not  quite,  as 
likely  to  land  the  believer  in  the  abyss  of  the 
damned,  as  in  the  paradise  of  God."  But  we 
are  digressing  from  the  subject  of  the  atonement. 
A  further  difficulty  presses  upon  the  aforesaid 
article  of  Methodist  faith.  It  represents  the 
ever  blessed  God  in  a  light,  in  which  it  is  impos- 
sible to  shield  his  character  from  the  charge  of 
cruelty  and  injustice.  It  is  assuredly  with  no 
design  to  retort  the  criminations  of  those  who,  in 
assailing  Calvinism  from  the  pulpit  and  the  press, 
ring  the  changes  upon  these  words,  that  we  make 
the  above  assertion.  We  believe  it  can  be  fairly 
and  logically  substantiated,  that  the  doctrine  of 
universal  atonement,  as  taught  by  Methodists, 
implies  a  foul  aspersion  upon  the  character  of 
Jehovah.  For,  notwithstanding  her  avowed  be- 
lief of  a  ' 'perfect  redemption,  propitiation,  and 
satisfaction,  for  all  the  sins  of  the  whole  world," 
Methodism  teaches  that  thousands  of  the  human 
family  will  be  driven  away  into  unquenchable  fire, 
to  satisfy  divine  justice  for  sins  for  which  there  is 
already  paid  a  i^erfect  satisfaction  by  the  all- 
perfect  Savior.  In  other  words,  that  a  God  of 
infinite  mercy,  after  his  holy  law  and  his  impar- 
tial justice  have  been  "perfectly"  satisfied  for  all 
sin,  will  demand  everlasting  sufferings  of  the  sin- 
ner, as  a  further  satisfaction;  which  is,  to  require 


156  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

a  double  payment  of  the  debt;  tlie  first  made  by- 
Christ,  full  and  perfect,  yet  ?o  imperfect,  as  to 
require  the  sufferings  of  the  sinner  to  all  eternity 
to  com})lete  it — a  satisfaction  (made  perfect  by 
Clirist)  wliich  does  not  sati:;-;fy;  and  the  sinner  is 
condemned  to  sutler  for  ever  to  make  perfection 
perfect;  a  perfect  salisfaL'tion,  which  shall  be  per- 
fectly satisfactory! 

Again:  It  is  not  denied,  that  it  was  infallibly 
known  to  Christ,  when  about  to  "die  the  accursed 
death,"  that  many  would  not  be  saved  by  his  sac- 
rifice; but  that  their  guilt  and  punishment  would 
be  greatly  aggravated,  if  his  blood  were  charged 
to  their  account.  What  then  can  be  more  revolt- 
ing to  every  right  feeling,  than  to  suppose  that 
the  blessed  Savior,  in  that  awful  and  tender  hour, 
when  he  poured  out  his  soul  an  offering  for  sin- 
ners, was  performing  for  thousands  that  which 
he  infallibly  for  ekneto  would  be  of  no  real  benefit 
to  them,  but  only  sink  them  down  under  tenfold 
vengeance  to  the  prison  of  despair?  If  this  is 
what  Methodism  terms  xhefreeness  of  grace  and 
the  fulness  of  divine  mercy  in  the  universal 
atonement,  truly  her  "tender  mercies  are  cruel." 
These,  Rev.  Sir,  are  some  of  the  beauties  of  that 
system  which  is  so  arrogantly  extolled  as  superior 
to  all  other  forms  of  religion.     "Consistency  is  a 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  157 

jewel,"  which  Methodism  seems  resolved  shall 
never  glitter  in  her  diadem. 

What  then  is  the  doctrine  of  atonement  taught 
in  the  Scriptures?  It  is  that  Christ  is  "the  Savior 
of  all  men,  especially  of  them  that  believe,"  He 
is  the  Savior  of  all — his  sacrifice  secured  import- 
ant benefits  not  only  to  this  world,  but  to  the  uni- 
verse. It  was  an  illustrious  monument  of  the 
divine  justice  and  hatred  of  sin,  and  the  highest 
display  of  infinite  grace  and  mercy.  The  subjects 
of  God's  universal  empire  looked  on  and  drank  in 
lessons  of  everlasting  wisdom.  He  is  the  Savior 
of  all.  The  exalted  character  of  the  Divine  vic- 
tim, and  the  intensity  of  his  sulierings,  impart  a 
value  to  the  atonement  sufficient  for  a  thousand 
worlds.  He  is  the  Savior  of  all,  but  not  in  the 
same  sense^  in  which  he  is  ^'■specially  the  Savior 
of  them  that  believe."  The  work  of  obedience, 
suffering  and  death,  has  been  well  and  fully  per- 
formed— the  sacrifice  of  "the  Lamb  of  God"  pos- 
sesses a  sufficiency  more  than  commensurate  with 
the  ruin  and  curse  introduced  by  sin.  On  the 
ground  of  this  sufficiency  the  Gospel  proclaims, 
"Ho,  every  one  that  thirsteth — Whosoever  will, 
let  him  come — All  things  are  now  ready."  The 
sinner  hears  this  call  of  merc}^  and  despising  its 
invitation,  dies  a  suicide.  The  gates  of  mercy 
were  open,  and  he  will  have  no  just  cause  of 


158  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OP 

cdmplaint,  if,  whilst  turning  his  back  upon  the 
glories  of  heaven,  and  freely  choosing  the  road  to 
ruin,  his  will  was  not  subdued  by  the  Spirit  of 
grace,  nor  he  "compelled  to  come  in."  No  prin- 
ciple of  tnUh  or  justice  will  be  violated  in  per- 
mitting the  rebel,  in  the  exercise  of  perfect  free- 
dom, to  make  such  a  disposition  of  his  time,  tal- 
ents, and  active  powers,  as  was  most  agreeable  to 
himself;  nor  in  inflicting  deserved  punishment  for 
perversion  and  abuse  of  distinguished  mercies. 
If  others  are  '•^made  willing  in  the  day  of  divine 
power" — if  "God  works  in  them  both  to  will  and 
to  do  of  his  good  pleasure" — it  is  an  act  of  infi- 
nite grace  to  them^  but  of  no  imaginable  injury  to 
those  that  perish — they  remain  precisely  where 
they  were,  and  tvould  have  been,  if  God  had  per- 
formed no  act  of  power  to  make  others  willing  to 
be  reconciled  and  restored  to  his  favor.  If  this  be 
^'partiality,"  show  the  injustice  or  the  caprice 
implied  in  the  charge.  If  God  has  "a  right  to  do 
what  he  will  with  his  oivn,^^  there  is  no  injus- 
tice. If  he  may,  for  wise  reasons  in  his  eternal 
mind,  select  from  the  mass  of  gidlt  and  wretch- 
edness the  objects  of  his  infinite  charity ,  there  is 
no  caprice.  "Who  art  thou  that  repliest  against 
God?" 

The  most  plausible  objection  to  the  Calvinistic 
view  of  the  atonement,  is  derived  from  the  terms, 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  159 

*«//,'  ^every  man,''  '•the  whole  world,'  employed 
by  the  sacred  M^riters  in  connection  witli  the  death 
of  Christ.     The  soUition  is  easy. 

1.  These  terms  must  often  be  interpreted  in  a 
limited  sense.  Exod.  9  :  6 — "^//  the  cattle  of 
Egypt  died."  Same  verse — "Of  the  cattle  of  the 
children  of  Israel,  (which  were  all  in  Egypt,) 
died  not  one."  Matth.  3  :  5,  6 — "Jerusalem,  and 
all  Judea,  and  all  the  region  round  about  Jordan, 
went  out  to  him  (John)  and  were  baptized."  Did 
John  baptize  every  man,  woman,  and  child,  in 
that  district?  Matth.  10  :  22 — "Ye  shall  be  hated 
by  all  men  for  my  name's  sake."  Does  this  in- 
clude the  pious,  and  those  who  never  heard  of  the 
apostles?  Luke  2  :  1 — "There  went  out  a  decree 
that  all  the  ivorld  should  be  taxed."  "And  all 
went  to  be  taxed."  Can  this  literally  mean  every 
individual  of  mankind?  Rom.  1  :  8 — "Your  faith 
is  spoken  of  throughout  the  whole  world '^  Surely 
not  among  those  who  had  never  heard  of  Chris- 
tianity, much  less  of  the  Christians  at  Rome. 

2.  The  Jews  had  imbibed  a  strong  prejudice, 
that  they  were  always  to  continue  the  peculiar 
and  highly  favored  people  of  God,  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  Gentiles.  Not  so,  say  the  apostles.  The 
Gospel  embraces  in  its  large  provisions  all  men, 
the  whole  world,  without  distinction  of  Jew  or 
Gentile,  bond  or  free. 


160  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

3.  Calvinists,  as  we  have  before  stated,  strenu- 
ously maintain  that  there  is  a  very  important 
sense  in  which  the  Savior  died  for  all — that  is, 
sufficiently  for  all.  So  that  if  all  had  been  saved, 
there  would  have  been  required  "no  more  sacri- 
fice for  sin."  No  soul  will  perish  because  of  a 
deficiency  in  the  merits  or  intrinsic  worth  of  the 
atonement.  71iat  we  hold  to  be,  in  the  strictest 
sense  of  the  terms,  infinite — absolute — all-suffi- 
cient. By  what  authority  then  does  Watson  af- 
firm that  "on  the  Calvinian  theory  the  bar  to  the 
salvation  of  the  non-elect  lies  in  the  ivant  of  a 
provided  sacrifice  for  sin?'\  Such  hardihood  of 
assertion  ill  becomes  a  master  in  Israel.  But  our 
object  is  to  be  brief. 

IV.  The  Difficulties  of  Methodism,  upox 
the  subject  of  regeneration,  and  the 
Evidences  of  a  change  of  heart. 

That  this  is  a  subject  of  immense  importance 
is  obvious  to  all.  Conformity  to  the  divine  pat- 
tern is  the  only  method  to  ensure  either  comfort 
or  safety  to  the  soul.  This  will  strike  conviction 
to  the  heart  of  the  secure  and  careless,  encourage 
the  feeble  Christian,  confirm  the  wavering,  and 
expose  the  hypocrite;  but  forsaking  this  infallible 
guide,  we  must  inevitably  wander  into  the  most 
extravagant  forms  of  delusion.    Indeed,  upon  cor- 


ARMINIAN   METHODISM.  161 

jFectness  in  this  matter  are  suspended  the  peace, 
purity,    and    general   welfare   of  the   Christian 
church.     How  then  is  this  subject  treated  among 
Methodists?*     Enter  their  houses  of  worship, 
attend  their  camp  meetings,  class  meetings,  &c., 
and  truly  it  will  demand  a  discerning  eye  to  dis- 
cover the  feeblest  resemblance  to  the  humility, 
meekness,  docility,  acquaintance  with  Scripture, 
and  knowledge  of  the  human  heart  and  the  Chris- 
tian warfare,  required  by  the  Savior  and  his  apos- 
tles.    Inquire  of  their  converts  the  evidence  of  a 
saving  change;  and  instead  of  that  clear,  intelli- 
gent disclosure  of  the  operations  of  the  divine 
Spirit  in   awaking,  convincing,  humbling,  per- 
suading, and  pointing  to  a  Redeemer's  blood,  you 
will  receive  a  confused  statement  of  "getting  re- 
ligion," amid  loud  noise,  confusion  of  tongues, 
praying,  singing,  and  swooning,  (more  like  a  re- 
ligious Babel  than  the  city  of  God,)  through  the 
whole  range  of  fanaticism.     Investigate  still  fur- 
ther, the  ground  of  their  hope,  and  you  will  re- 
ceive, not  a  statement  of  Christian  faith,  a  simple, 
consolatory,  heart-purifying  dependence  upon  the 
Atoning  blood  and  perfect  righteousness  of  Christy 

*  It  is  cheerfully  admitted  that  some  parts  of  the  en- 
«uing  picture  may  be  rather  strongly  colored  for  certain 
localities,  particularly  our  cities  and  large  villages.    Not- 
withstoiiding,  '^we  speak  that  we  do  know." 
U 


108  THB    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

but  a  declaration  of  bold  assurance,  of  self- confi- 
dence, and  many  unequivocal  signs  of  a  deceived 
heart.  Instead  of  self-knowledge,  a  deep  ac- 
quaintance with  the  errors,  corruptions,  and  va- 
rious devices  of  the  human  heart,  you  will  hear 
of  Christian  perfection  and  a  continual  willingness 
to  die.  Instead  of  a  meek  reliance  upon  the  Sa- 
vior's merits  and  the  Spirit's  aid,  you  will  be  told 
that  "God  is  merciful,  and  if  I  only  persevere  and 
keep  straight  on  in  the  path  of  duty,  God  will 
continue  to  bless  me  in  prayer,  and  all  will  be 
well  at  last." 

The  extensive  prevalence  in  that  denomination 
of  the  most  mischievous  errors  respecting  the  new 
birth,  flows  principally  from  the  defective  and 
Unscriptural  representations  made  by  their  reli- 
gious teachers.  What,  for  example,  is  better 
adapted  to  mislead  a  serious  inquirer,  than  the 
Following  statements  respecting  faith.  "Faith 
necessarily  implies  an  assurance  that  Chxisilovecl 
me  and  gave  himself  for  me."  Wes.  Serm.,  vol.1, 
p.  209.  Again:  "Whoever  has  «  si^re  c(7>2y?f/(??ice 
in  God,  that  through  the  merits  of  Christ  his  sins 
are  forgiven,  he  is  a  child  of  God.^^  Doct.  Tracts, 
p.  300.  In  the  first  passage,  the  young  or  feeble 
Christian  is  told,  that  until  he  has  a  full  assur- 
ance of  the  love  of  Christ,  he  remains  an  enemy 
€^f  God;  and  in    the  second,  the  formalist  and 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  IM 

hypocrite  who  have  worked  themselves  into  a 
strong  confidence  of  the  divine  favor,  are  assured 
that  they  are  children  of  God.*  Under  such  in- 
struction with  regard  to  the  "fruits  of  the  Spirit," 
we  need  not  be  surprised  at  the  grossest  mistakes 
respecting  his  gracious  work  upon  the  heart. 

Nor  is  the  doctrine  of  'grace,'  as  taught  in  that 
denomination,  a  whit  better  adapted  to  foster 
aught  but  a  spurious  piety.  In  reply  to  the  posi- 
tion that  "God  might  justly  have  passed  by  all 
men,"  Wesley  says,  "Are  you  sure  he  might?  I 
cannot  find  it  in  the  word  of  God.  Therefore  I 
reject  it  as  a  bold,  precarious  assertion."  "That 
God  might  justly,  for  my  unfaithfulness  to  his 
grace,  have  given  me  up  long  ago,  I  grant;  but 
this  supposes  me  to  have  had  that  grace,"  &c. 
Doct.  Tracts,  p.  25.  Which  is  the  same  as  to 
say,  that  God  could  not  justly  have  .punished 
mankind  without  providing  a  Savior,  and  through 
him,  sufficient  grace  for  them — that  although  it 
will  be  just  in  him  to  punish  for  "unfaithfulness 
to  his  grace,"  yet  to  inflict  the  penalty  of  his 

*  And  yet  Wesley  elsewhere  flatly  contradicts  himself 
in  the  above  assertion,  and  writes  in  the  following  scrip. 
tural  style:  "What  is  saving  faith?  I  dare  not  say  that  it 
is  only  helieving  conjideiitly  my  sins  are  forgiven  me  for 
Christ's  sake;  for  if  I  live  in  sin,  that  belief  is  a  destruc- 
tive conceit.''''  Doct.  Tracts,  p.  232.  A  man  of  Wesley'* 
loose  views  and  rapid  pen,  ought  to  have  had  at  least  a 
good  memory. 


164  THE    DirnCULTIBf    OF 

broken  law,  without  first  providing  grace  for  sin- 
ners, would  he  unjust.  In  other  words,  that 
God's  infinite  grace  in  giving  his  only  begotten 
Son,  was  not  an  act  of  grace  at  all,  but  an  act  of 
simple  justice!  Could  any  thing  be  more  suited 
to  cherish  pride  and  self-suificiency  in  the  human 
heart? 

What  Christian  mind  but  will  revolt,  and  even 
shudder,  whilst  perusing  the  following  passage 
from  the  same  volume.  Speaking  of  Christian 
perfection,  **We  know,"  snys  Wesley,  *'that  God 
may,  with  m«u's  good  leave,  cut  short  his  work, 
in  whatever  degree  he  pleases,  and  do  the  usual 
work  of  many  years  in  a  moment."  We  submit 
to  every  candid  and  intelligent  man,  whether  the 
spiritual  instruction,  of  which  the  above  is  a  spe- 
cimen, may  not.  u]}riGn,  be  expsotcd  to  produce, 
not  the  fair  and  glorious  lineaiiicnts  of  the  image 
of  God,  but  a  monstrous  abortion  of  every  thing 
like  genuine  piety.  Nor  will  the  authorized  test 
of  such  religion,  be  more  rational  and  scriptural 
than  the  thing  itself. 

Upon  this  topic,  associated  so  intimately  with 
all  our  hopes  of  immortality,  the  following  ex^ 
tracts  from  the  treatise  of  President  Edwards,  on 
Religious  Affections,  are  directly  in  point.  "It 
may  be  proper  to  premise,  that  the  illustrious 
author  of  this  work  was  not  one  of  those  who 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  16^ 

admit  the  form,  but  deny  the  power  of  vital  piety. 
On  the  contrary,  lie  was  most  extensively  en- 
gaged in  those  great  revivals,  which  in  his  day 
blessed  the  earth,  and  was  himself  a  principal  in- 
strument in  those  thrilling  displays  of  Divine 
power  then  exhibited.  The  favorable  opinion  of 
his  ministerial  character,  entertained  by  Mr.  AVes- 
ley,  may  be  learned  from  page  4C2,  vol.  3,  of  hii 
Sermons.  Speaking  of  'Hhe  wonderful  work  of 
God  in  New  England,"  Mr.  AV.  says,  *'It  began 
in  Northampton,  and  in  a  little  time  appeared  in 
adjoining  towns.  A  particular  and  beautiful  ac- 
count of  this  was  published  by  Mr.  Edwards, 
minister  of  Northampton.  Many  sinners  were 
deeply  convinced  of  sin,  and  many  truly  convert- 
ed to  God.  I  suppose  there  had  been  no  instance 
in  America  of  so  swift  and  deep  a  work  of  grace 
for  a  hundred  years  before;  nay,  nor  perhaps  since 
the  English  settled  there."  What  then  were  the 
lessons  of  wisdom  which  this  devoted  and  suc- 
cessful servant  of  Christ  gleaned  from  this  exten- 
sive field  of  experience?  (We  quote  from  the 
edition  of  his  works  published  in  New  York, 
1830.) 

1.   Great  affections. — "It  is  no  evidence  that 

religious  affections  are  of  a  spiritual  nature  that 

they  are  great;  as  is  manifest  in  the  case  of  th» 

Israelites  at  the  Red  Sea  and  Mount  Sinai,  who 

14* 


166  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

soon  forgot  his  works.  Great  multitudes  were 
affected  with  the  miracle  of  raising  Lazarus,  and 
were  elevated  to  a  high  degree,  and  made  a  mighty 
stir  when  Jesus  soon  after  entered  Jerusalem, 
But  Christ  had  at  this  time  but  few  disciples,  and 
how  quickly  was  their  fervor  at  an  end!  How 
soon  is  tlie  cry  changed  from  hosanna,  hosanna, 
to  crucify  him,  crucify  him!"  pp.  38,  39. 

2.  Much  forwardness  of  conversation  about 
religion. — "This  may  be  from  a  good  cause  or 
from  a  bad  one.  False  affections,  if  they  are 
equally  strong,  are  much  more  forward  to  declare 
themselves,  than  true;  because  it  is  the  nature  of 
false  religion  to  affect  show  and  observation;  as  it 
was  with  the  Pharisees.  Hence  a  man  some- 
times covertly  commends  himself,  and  tells  you 
a  long  story  of  conversion.  Why,  the  secret 
meaning  is,  'I  pray  admire  me.'  Hence  he  com- 
plains of  wants  and  weaknesses.  *I  pray  think 
what  a  broken-hearted  Christian  I  am.'  "  p.  44. 

3.  "TVic  power  of  Satan  may  be  as  imme- 
diate and  as  evident  in  false  comforts  and  joys,  as 
in  terrors  and  horrid  suggestions.  And  where 
neither  a  good  nor  evil  spirit  has  any  immediate 
hand,  persons,  especially  such  as  are  of  a  weak 
and  vapory  habit,  may  have  strange  apprehen- 
sions  and   imaginations,    and    strong   affections 


ARMiMAN    METHODISM.  167 

attending  them,  unaccountably  arising,  which  are 
not  voluntary."  p.  48. 

4.  ^'■The  unmorfified  corritplion  of  the  heart 
may  quench  the  Spirit  of  God,  (after  he  has  been 
striving,)  and  lead  men  to  presumptuous  and  self- 
exalting  hopes  and  joys,  as  well  as  otherwise." 
p.  62. 

5.  *'^n  overbearing,  high-handed,  and  vio- 
lent sort  of  confidence,  affecting  to  declare  itself 
with  3  most  glaring  show  in  the  sight  of  men, 
has  not  the  countenance  of  a  Christian  assurance. 
It  savors  more  of  the  spirit  of  the  Pharisees,  who 
never  doubted  that  they  were  most  eminent  saints, 
and  were  bold  to  thank  God  for  the  great  distinc- 
tion he  had  made  between  them  and  others.  Arid 
when  Christ  intimated  that  tliey  were  blind  and 
graceless,  they  despised  the  suggestion:  'Are  we 
blind  also?'  "  p.  74. 

6.  The  hypocrite's  hope. — *'When  once  a 
hypocrite  is  established  in  a  false  hope,  he  has 
not  as  many  occasions  of  doubt  as  the  true  saint. 
1st.  He  has  not  the  same  cautious  spirit,  the 
dread  of  being  deceived.  2d.  He  has  not  the 
knowledge  of  his  own  blindness,  and  the  mean 
opinion  of  his  own  understanding,  that  the  tni6 
saint  has.  3d.  The  devil  does  not  assault  his 
hope  as  he  does  the  hope  of  a  true  saint.  4th.  He 
bas  not  the  same  view  of  his  own  corruption;  a 


168  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

false  hope  hides  corruption,  covers  it  all  over, 
and  the  hypocrite  seems  clean  and  bright  in  his 
own  eyes.  Oftentimes  persons  of  tliis  kind  are 
led  away  by  impulses  and  imagined  revelations. 
A  strong  confidence  is  with  them  the  highest 
virtue.  Itence  they  are  bold  to  say,  '/  knoiv 
this  or  that — /  knoiv  certainly — /  aj7i  as  sure 
as  that  I  have  a  being'' — and  tlie  like:  and  they 
despise  all  argument  and  inquiry  into  the  case." 
pp.  75,  76. 

7.  The  appearance  of  some  external  shape. — 
"Some  have  had  lively  ideas  of  some  external 
shape  and  beautiful  form  of  countenance:  and  this 
they  call  spiritually  seeing  Christ.  Some  have 
had  impressed  upon  them  ideas  of  great  light;  of 
Christ  hanging  upon  the  cross,  and  his  blood  run- 
ning from  his  wounds;  of  a  beautiful  countenance 
smiling  upon  them,  <S^c.  &c.  But  these  things 
are  owing  rather  to  weakness  of  body  and  mind, 
than  to  spiritual  operations.  Nor  is  the  image  of 
("hrist  which  men  conceive  in  their  imaginations, 
at  all  superior  in  kind  to  the  idea  tlie  Papists 
conceive  of  Christ,  by  the  beautiful  and  affecting 
images  which  they  see  in  their  churches."  pp. 
107,  '8,  '9. 

8.  The  hearing  of  voices. — "Satan  is  trans- 
formed into  an  angel  of  light.  Hence  some  have 
heard  voices;  some  have  seen  the  very  blood  of 


ARMINIAN   METHODISM.  169 

Christ  dropping  on  them,  and  seen  the  wounds  in 
his  side;  some  have  seen  a  great  light  shining  in 
the  chamber;  some  in  great  distress  have  had  in- 
ward witness,  ^Hhy  sins  are  forgiven  thee;^*  and 
hence  such  liberty  and  joy,  that  they  are  ready  to 
leap  up  and  down  the  chamber.  Thus  natural 
men  would  fain  see  Jesus,  and  have  him  present 
to  give  them  peace,  just  as  the  Papists  have  his 
images.  Wo  to  them  that  have  no  other  mani- 
fested Christ."  p.  109. 

9.  The  affections  of  hypocrites. — "They  are 
first  much  affected  with  some  impression  upon 
their  imagination,  or  some  impulse,  which  they 
take  to  be  a  testimony  from  God,  of  his  love  and 
their  happiness.  They  fancy  a  high  privilege  in 
some  respect,  either  with  or  without  a  text  of 
Scripture;  they  are  mightily  taken  with  this  as  a 
great  discovery;  and  hence  arise  high  affections, 
which  they  call  great  and  wonderful  experiences; 
and  they  have-  a  notion  that  God  is  greatly  pleased 
with  those  affections.  This  affects  them  still 
more.  Thus  their  affections  rise  higher  and 
higher,  until  they  are  sometimes  perfectly  swal- 
lowed up.  Also,  self-conceit  and  fierce  zeal  rise; 
and  all  is  built,  like  a  castle  in  the  air,  on  nothing 
but  imagination,  self-love,  and  pride."  p.  139. 

10.  The  talk  of  hypocrites. — "As  are  their 
thoughts,  so  is   their  talk.     They  speak  much 


70  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

about  their  experiences  and  the  greatness  of  their 
attainments.  The  true  saint  will  speak  much  of 
God,  his  glorious  perfections  and  works,  the 
beauty  and  amiableness  of  Christ,  and  the  glori- 
ous tilings  of  the  Gospel.  But  hypocrites  talk 
more  of  the  discovery,  than  of  the  thing  discover- 
ed. They  are  full  of  talk  about  the  wonderful 
discoveries  they  have  had,  how  sure  they  are  of 
the  love  of  God  to  them,  liow  safe  their  condition 
is,  how  they  know  they  shall  go  to  heaven,"  &c. 
p.  139. 

11.  Self -knoivl edge. — "The  high  affections  of 
many  are  built  on  the  supposition  of  their  being 
eminent  saints.  If  that  opinion  of  themselves 
were  taken  away,  if  they  thought  they  were  some 
of  the  lower  form  of  saints,  their  high  affections 
would  fall  to  tlie  ground.  If  they  saw  only  a 
little  of  the  sinfulness  and  vileness  of  their  own 
hearts,  and  their  deformity  in  their  best  duties,  it 
would  destroy  tlieir  affections.  Because  they 
are  built  on  self,  self-knowledge  would  destroy 
them."  p.  140. 

12.  Enthusiasm. — *'A11  imaginary  sights  of 
God,  arid  Christ,  and  heaven;  all  supposed  wit- 
nessing of  the  Spirit,  by  immediate  inward  sug- 
gestion; all  impressions  of  future  events;  all  im- 
pressions and  applications  of  Scripture,  as  though 
they  were  words  now   immediately  spoken  by 


ARMIMAN    METHODISM.  171 

God  to  a  particular  person,  in  a  new  meaning, 
and  carrying  something  more  in  ihem  than  they 
contain  as  they  lie  in  the  Bible:  these  are  all  to 
be  referred  to  the  head  of  impressions  on  the 
imagination,  and  consist  not  in  a  divine  sense  and 
relish  of  the  heart  for  the  holy  beauty  and  excel- 
lency of  divine  things.  But  such  sort  of  experi- 
ences and  discoveries  commonly  raise  the  affec- 
tions of  such  as  are  deluded  by  them  to  a  great 
height,  and  make  a  mighty  uproar  in  both  soul 
and  body;  and  men,  especially  the  common  peo- 
ple, are  easily  bewitched  with  such  things — they 
have  such  a  glaring  and  glistening  show  of  high 
religion."  p.  168. 

These  are  only  a  specimen.  The  work 
abounds  with  similar  passages,  which,  although 
published  about  the  middle  of  the  last  century, 
and  of  course  before  the  abuses  of  Methodism 
had  attracted  very  much  notice  in  this  country, 
seem  as  if  written  in  the  Spirit  of  prophecy,  to 
brand  the  wide-spread  delusions  of  that  system, 
and  to  lift  up  a  standard  against  the  overwhelm- 
ing flood  of  wild-fire,  enthusiasm,  and  extrava- 
gance, which  is  threatening  to  submerge  the 
world. 

These  errors  on  the  grent  doctrine  of  Regene- 
ration, we,  Rev.  Sir,  consider  higly  dangerous. 


IfJJ  THE    DIFFICULTIES   OF 

They  have  been  presented  as  plainly  and  forcibly 
as  was  in  my  power;  but  without  any  design  to 
give  unnecessary  pain.  May  **the  Author  of 
every  good  and  perfect  gift"  defeat  all  that  is 
wrong,  and  abundantly  bless  and  prosper  what- 
ever is  agreeable  to  his  holy  will. 


AhMINIAN   METHODISM.  173 


LETTER    V. 

Siriless  Perfection.     Characteristics  of  a  Work 

of  the  Spirit. 
Rev.  Sir: 

Connected  with  the  topic  last  discussed,  as  an 
effect  with  its  cause,  the  doctiine  of  Perfection 
comes  next  under  review.  Wesley,  it  is  worthy 
to  be  premised,  traces  this  unscriptural  sentiment 
as  far  back  at  least  as  Pelagius,  in  the  fourth  cen- 
tury. "I  verily  believe,"  he  says,  "  the  real 
heresy  of  Pelagius  was  neither  more  nor  less  than 
this,  the  holding  that  Christians  may,  by  the 
grace  of  God,  go  on  to  perfection."  And  lest 
such  suspicious  ancestry  should  bring  the  doc- 
trine into  disrepute,  he  adds  of  Pelagius,  *'I  would 
not  affirm,  that  he  was  not  one  of  the  holiest  men 
of  the  age."  Let  us  inquire  into  the  theological 
relations  of  this  distinguishing  characteristic  of 
Pelagianism.* 

*  Of  Pelagius  we  learn  from  the  best  authorities  that 
he  "denied  original  sin,  maintained  man's  plenary  ability, 
the  moral  purity  of  infants,  justification  by  our  own  right- 
eousness," with  some  other  unscriptural  tenets.  And  yet 
of  this  heretic,  Wesley  says,  "I  guess  he  was  both  a  wise 
and  a  holy  many  "A  fellow-feeling  makes  us  wondrous 
kind."    Sefm.v.2,p.323.    Misc.  Works,  v.  3,  p. 259. 

15 


174  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

V.  The  Difficulties  of  Methodism,  in  refe- 
rence TO  "Sinless  Perfection." 

We  shall  be  met  at  the  threshold  of  this  dis- 
cussion with  a  stout  denial  that  this  is  a  doctrinal 
feature  of  modern  Methodism.  It  is  matter  both 
of  surprise  and  regret,  that  the  advocates  of  the 
system  should  seem  to  expose  themselves  to  the 
charge  of  a  want  of  candor  in  the  occasional  de- 
bates which  take  place-upon  this  question.  Would 
it  ever  be  imagined  by  an  honest,  upright,  consci- 
entious man,  that  when  it  is  so  often  and  so  ve- 
hemently denied  that  Methodists  maintain  the 
doctrine  of  "sinless  perfection,"  all  that  is  meant, 
is,  that  they  reject  tlie  pliraseology,  the  icorcls, 
not  that  they  do  not  liold  and  teach  the  senti- 
ment? Yet  that  this  is  the  simple  verity,  is  proved 
by  a  reference  to  their  standard  authors.  Thus: 
**We  are  all  agreed  we  may  be  saved  from  all  sin 
before  death;  i.  e.,  from  all  sinful  tempers  and  de- 
sires." "Grown  Christians  are  in  such  a  sense 
perfect  as  to  be  freed  from  evil  tempers  and  de- 
sires. Ev€ry  one  of  these  can  say,  I  am  cruci- 
fied with  Christ,  nevertheless  I  live,  &c.;  words 
that  manifestly  describe  a  deliveremce  from  in- 
ward as  well  as  from  outward  sin.''  Doct. 
Tracts,  pp.  293,  296.  These  extracts  are  made 
from  a  volume,  which,   as  we  are  told  in   the 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  175 

advertisement,  was  originally  bound  and  published 
with  the  Form  of  Discipline,  and  is  now  "stereo- 
typed," for  the  benefit  of  the  church.  Many 
parallel  passages  might  be  added,  from  the  Ser- 
mons of  Wesley  and  others,  but  these  will  enable 
us  to  understand  what  is  meant  when  "sinless 
perfection"  is  disclaimed  with  so  much  vehe- 
mence. 

But  perhaps  no  publication,  (if  we  except  the 
writings  of  the  first  apostle  of  Methodism,)  is 
more  popular  among  modern  Arrainians,  than  the 
labored  and  superficial  work  of  Fletcher,  which' 
he  entitles,  "Checks  to  Antinomianism;"  the  ob- 
ject of  which  is  to  cry  down  Calvinism  by  an 
unpopular  epithet.*  It  is  a  fact,  strictly  analo- 
gous to  past  experience  of  human  weakness  and 
fallibility,  that  those  who  urge  this  unfounded 
charge  of  Antinomian  tendencies  are  themselves 
most  guilty.  This  truth  is  aptly  illustrated  in  the 
doctrine  under  review.  It  is  not  that  these  per-' 
fectionists  imagine  they  live  without  transgressing 
the  "moral  lav/,"  but  they  regard  it  as  no  longer 

*  TJie  late  learned  Dr.  Jas.  Gray  observes  of  Fletcher, 
"He  fails  in  soundness  of  judgment.  He  is  sometimes 
the  dupe  of  his  own  ingenuity;  and  while  he  dexterously 
extricates  himself  from  one  difficulty,  he  not  seldom  falls 
into  another.  He  must  be  read  with  discriminating  at- 
tention, as  he  weaves  soincjine  webs  which  are  good  for 
riQthinrr.^^     Rev.  p.  317. 


176  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

in  force.  Christians  are  not  under  law,  but  im- 
der  grace;  under  a  milder  code  of  legislative  re- 
quirement than  the  decalogue;  a  form  of  obliga- 
tion suited  to  man's  impaired  ability;  brought 
down  to  his  capacity  as  a  fallen  creature,  and  to 
which  he  may  and  can  yield  z  perfect  obedience, 
and  is  therefore  sinlessly  perfect.  Hear  upon 
this  topic  the  standards  of  Methodism,  pp.  123, 
124:  ''Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law — 1.  The 
Mosaic  law.  2.  The  Adamic  law,  called  the  law 
of  works,  which  required  that  man  should  use  to 
the  glory  of  God,  all  the  powers  with  which  he 
was  created,  and  which  "was  proportioned  to  his 
original  powers,  and  required  that  he  should  al- 
ways think,  speak,  and  act  precisely  right,  in 
every  point  whatever."  "He  was  well  able  to 
do  so,  and  God  could  not  but  require  the  service 
he  was  able  to  pay."  Then  what  follows?  Why, 
•*Adam  fell;"  and  in  consequence,  "no  man  is 
able  to  perform  the  service  which  the  Adamic  law 
requires."  And  now  for  the  conclusion  :  "And 
no  man  is  obliged  to  perform  it.  God  doth  not 
require  it  of  any  man.  Christ  is  the  end  of  the 
Adamic  as  well  as  the  Mosaic  law.  By  his  death 
he  put  an  end  to  both.  He  hath  abolished  both 
the  one  and  the  other,  with  regard  to  man;  and 
the  obligation  to  observe  either  the  one  or  the 
other  is  vanished  away.     Nor  is  any  man  living 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  177 

bound  to  observe  the  Adamic  more  than  the  Mo- 
saic law."  This,  I  should  suppose,  is  Anti- 
nomianism  of  sufficient  "proof"  to  suit  the  appe- 
tite of  the  grossest  devotee  of  sensuality.  This 
is  the  modern  method  of  perfection — not  by  as- 
cending the  steep  of  moral  obligation,  but  by 
bringing  the  requirements  of  the  divine  law  down 
to  a  level  with  the  sinner's  convenience! 

But  as  if  to  render  the  doctrine  ridiculous  and 
absurd,  as  well  as  licentious,  Wesley,  in  his 
''Plain  Account  of  Chiistian  Perfection,"  defines 
it,  "the  loving  God  witli  all  our  heart,  mind,  soul, 
and  strength.  This  implies,  (he  says,)  that  no 
wrong  temper,  none  contrary  to  love,  remains  in 
the  soul;  and  that  all  llie  thoughts,  words,  and 
actions  are  governed  by  pure  love."  But  what 
more  than  this  does  the  moral  law  require?  Could 
Adam  before  his  fall  do  more  than  this?  Can 
saints  and  angels  in  heaven?*  Yet  he  admits 
that  a  perfect  Christian  is  not  freed  from  "infirmi- 
ties, ignorance,  and  mistake;"  but  "where  every 
word  and  action  springs  from  love,  a  mistake  is 
not  properly  sin."  Still  he  further  assures  us, 
these  sinless  mistakes  "need  the  atoning  blood." 
Such   is   a   fair  specimen  of  the  jargon  every 

*  Wesley  himself  affirms — "The  loving  God  with  all 
the  heart,"  "is  the  most  exalted  height  of  man  or  angel." 
Misc.Works,  vol.1,  p.228. 
15* 


178  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

where  current  among  the  followers  of  this  great 
Artninian! 

Be  it  remembered,  therefore,  that  although  "no 
man  living  is  obliged  to  observe"  the  moral  law, 
yet  "Christian  perfection"  surpasses  the  limits 
of  moral  obligation,  and  performs  works  of  super- 
erocration,  more  than  can  riiihteously  be  demand- 
ed.  Every  perfect  Methodist  "loves  God  with 
all  his  heart,  soul,  mind,  and  strength,"  and  "all 
his  thoughts,  words,  and  actions,  are  governed  by 
pure  love;"  and  nothing  more  was  ever  required 
by  the  "moral  law." 

But  that  we  may  more  fully  comprehend  the 
mysteries  of  this  smgular  subject,  let  us  dwell  a 
few  moments  farther  upon  its  theological  rela- 
tions. Mr.  Fletcher,  (afler  Wesley,)  admits  that 
the  most  advanced  Christian  falls  short,  in  this 
life,  of  the  obedience  required  by  the  ip.oral  or 
Adamic  law,  which  he  calls  "the  Creator's  onti- 
evangdicuU  paradisaical  law  of  innocence,  and 
which  he  thinks  has  been  abolished.  Instead  of 
that  original  constitution,  lie  holds  to  "a  miltler 
law,  adapted  to  our  state  and  circumstances" — 
"the  evanp^ellcal  mediatorial  law  of  our  Redeem- 
er." (See  last  Clieck.)  It  is  by  this  milder  law 
that  Christians  are  tried,  and  by  which  they  are 
correctly  considered  "perfect;"  that  is,  as  having 


ARMIMAN    METHODISM.  179 

yielded  comphle  obedience  to  the  only  law  which 
now  requires  their  respect  and  submission. 

Now,  without  pausing  particularly  to  inquire, 
what  is  the  precise  meaning  of  a  ^"inilder  laio;^^ 
that  is,  a  law  less  strict,  less  perfect,  less  like 
God,  than  the  one  which  Ave  know  was  "holy, 
just,  and  good;"  witliout  too  nicely  inquiring, 
whether  this  new  law  is  less  holy,  less  just,  and 
less  good;  whether  the  nature  of  moral  good  and 
evil  is  changed,  so  that  this  new  law  of  God  will 
not  condemn  (dl  sin;  whether  the  "moral  law"  be 
indeed  "anti-evangelical,"  '•'■against  the  promises 
of  God,"  (Gal.  3:21;)  and  lastly,  ivhere  this 
milder  law  is  revealed  in  the  New  Testament,  by 
Him  who  said,  "I  am  come  not  fo  destroy  the 
lawf^  or  by  him  v/ho  inquire?,  "Do  we  make 
void  the  law  tliroujjh  faith.?  God  forbid!" — or  by 
liim  who  asserts,  "Sin  is  the  transgression  of  the 
law^'' — not  "p/"  a  diviie  Ima,^^  as  r\Ir.  Fletdier 
has  it.  Passing  all  these,  let  us  exam.ine  nar- 
rowly the  logical  consistency  of  the  very  ground- 
work of  the  scheme.  Man,  they  tvell  us,  became 
by  his  fall  morally  unable  to  render  the  obedience 
required  by  the  moral  law,  and  "God  does  not 
require  it  of  any  man;"  but  in  infinite  grace,  has 
placed  us  under  "the  new  evangelical  law  of  our 
Redeemer,"  which  we  are  morally  able  to  obey, 
and  are  hound  to  respect  in  thought,  word,  and 


180  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

deed.  It  \v:is  t!i8  great  work  which  was  given 
Christ  to  do,  to  make  a  '^perfect  satisfaction"'  for 
our  "original  sin,"  to  introduce  a  jnilder  law, 
and  apply  the  merits  of  his  blood  to  atone  for  our 
deficiencies  and  shortcomings  of  obedience  to  the 
evangelical  laiu,  which  deficiencies  do  "need  the 
atoning  blood,"  even  in  our  estate  of  sinless  per- 
fection. 

Wiiat  a  rops  of  sand  have  we  here!  In  the 
firat  place,  liow  strange  an  abuse  of  language,  to 
say  the  least,  is  it,  to  represent  it  as  a  distinguish- 
ing feature  of  Gospel  GUACE,  that  Christ  should 
^^abolish'^  or  "/??^/  an  emV  to  a  law  with  regard 
to  man,  which  law,  man  having  become. unable  to 
obey,  was' not  in  justice  bound  to  observe,  nor 
could  jwitly  be  punished  for  neglecting  to  ob- 
serve!! And  in  the  second  place,  if  Christ  has 
introduced  a  milder  law,  requiring  no  more  than 
imperfect  sincere  obedience — if  the  new  law  is  so 
adapted  to  our  weak  and  fallen  condition,  that  in- 
stead of  the  rigorous  exactions  of  the  'moral  law,' 
we  are  now  bound  by  milder  obligations,  and  God 
will  accept  the  less  perfect  (or  imperfect)  service 
we  are  able  to  render,  and  can  justly  require  of 
us  no  other — still  the  inquiry  returns,  where  is 
the  wonderful  GRACE  discoverable  in  this  ar- 
rangement? What  need  of  Christ's  dying  to  se- 
<>nre  the  acceptance  on  the  part  of  the  Judge,  of 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  181 

such  obedience  as  it  would  be  unjust  for  him  not 
to  accept?  Or  in  other  words,  did  Christ  die  to 
prevent  unrighteousness  with  God?  Did  he  die 
to  avert  from  our  heads  punishment  for  imperfect 
obedience,  when  in  fact  we  can  be  justly  bound  to 
obey  no  law  which  requires  any  other  than  im- 
perfect obedience? 

The  doctrine  which  we  have  thus  endeavored 
to  state,  as  nearly  as  possible  in  the  words  of  its 
advocates,  would  seem  to  carry  with  it  its  own 
refutation,  and  it  would  appear  to  be  altogether  a 
work  of  supererogation  to  enter  into  any  further 
argument  to  prove  its  folly.  Profound  indeed 
must  be  the  ignorance  of  the  purity,  perpetuity, 
perfection,  and  spirituality  of  the  divine  law,  and 
great  must  be  the  inattention  to  the  plain  state- 
ments of  the  Scriptures,  \vhicli  will  admit  such  a 
sentiment  into  a  theological  system!  *'In  many 
things  we  offend  all;"  or  all  are  in  many  things 
chargeable  with  sin.  James  3  :  2.  "Wliatis  man 
that  he  should  be  clean,  or  he  that  is  born  of  a 
woman  that  he  should  be  righteous."  Job  15:14. 
*'There  is  not  a  just  man  on  earth  that  doeth  good 
and  sinneth  not."  Eccles.  7:  20.  "For  there  is 
no  man  that  sinneth  not."  1  Kings  8  :  4G.  And 
in  chap.  9:20,  Job  asserts,  "If  I  say  I  am  per- 
fect, it  shall  also  prove  me  perverse."  Paul  also, 
speaking  of  himself,  says,  "Not  as  though  I  were 


183  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

already  perfect.''  Phil.  3  :  12.  We  have  reason 
to  suspect  that  neither  of  these  ancient  wortliies 
knew  any  tiling  about  "sinless  perfection.'*    "The 

perfect  Christian,  according  to  the  representations 
of  Holy  Writ,  is  he  who  continually  aspires  to 
universal  holiness  of  heart  and  life,  uniformly  and 
habitually  endeavoring  'to  stand  perfect  and  com- 
plete in  all  the  will  of  God;'  who  daily  and  fer- 
vently prays,  like  the  apostles,  for  increase  of 

faith,  and  strenuoii.sly  labors  to  add  to  his  faith, 
virtue;  to  virtue,  knowledge;  to  knowledge,  tem- 
perance; and  to  temperance,  patience;  a  id  to  pa- 
tience, godliness;  and  to  godliness,  brotherly  kind- 
ness; and  to  brotherly  kindness,  cliarily."  Such 
was  Job,  and  such  was  Paul;  each  of  whom  would 
nevertheless  willingly  confess,  "not  as  thougli  I 
were  already  perfect." 

Still  farther:  If  one  person  could  be  found  in  a 
perfectly  sinless  state,  there  would  be  one  excep- 
tion to  the  use  of  that  universal  prayer,  taught  by 
our  Lord  himself,  in  which,  whilst  we  arc  in- 
structed to  say,  "  Give  us  (his  day  our  dailt/ 
brcad,'\\ve  are  required,  with  no  less  frequency, 
to  implore  forgiveness  of  our  '■''trespasses,  as  ice 
forgive  those  ivho  trespass  against  lis.''  There 
would  be  one  who  could  say,  I  have  no  sin  daily 
committed,  why  should  I  supplicate  daily  for- 
giveness.    Thus   is    the    commandment   of  the 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  183 

Most  High  God  made  of  none  effect  by  the  tra- 
ditions of  men. 

And  what  is  even  more  revolting  to  every 
Christian  feeling — if  the  wise  King  of  Israel  were 
now  on  earth,  and  should  utter  that  humble  ac- 
knowledgment, "  There  is  not  a  just  man  on 
earth  that  doeth  good  and  sinneth  not,"  many  a 
Methodist  would  start  from  his  seat  to  correct  his 
error,  and  erase  the  line  from  the  records  of  in- 
spiration. Yes !  whatever  fSolomon  may  have 
thought,  there  are  noiv  just  men  on  earth  who 
can  kneel  in  the  presence  of  God,  and  thank  him 
that  they  love  him  as  fervently  and  constantly  as 
they  ought,  and  obey  him  as  perfectly  as  they 
ought;  and  this  too  in  direct  defiance  of  their  own 
article,  which  asserts  that  "  good  works  cannot 
endure  the  severity  of  God's  judgment."  Art.  10. 
We,  Rev.  Sir,  had  been  accustomed  to  think  that 
such  were  the  "height,  and  depth,  and  length, 
and  breadth,"  of  the  love  of  Christ,  which  passes 
knowledge,  and  such  the  imperfections  and  cor- 
ruptions of  the  body  of  this  death,  that  no  mortal 
man  would  return  to  the  Savior  a  love  as  strong, 
and  constant,  and  fervent,  as  he  ought;  but  it 
seems  we  labored  under  a  mistake.  We  had  for- 
gotten those  perfect  Christians,  who,  had  they 
lived  in  the  days  of  Isaiah,  when  as  yet  the  pro- 
phecy was  not  sealed  up,  must,  for  the  credit  of 


184  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

divine  truth,  have  proposed  an  amendment  in  the 
61  ih  cliapter — "f/^e  are  all  as  an  unclean  thing, 
and  all  our  righteousnesses  are  as  filthy  rags — 
excepUngafeiv  very  good  jKople  called  Method- 
ists:' 

But  in  reply  to  the  numerous  express  declara- 
tions of  the  writers  of  the  Old  Testament  in  oppo- 
sition to  this  doctrine,  Wesley  affirms  that  "they 
lived  under  a  dispensation  greatly  inferior  to  the 
Christian,  and  that  nothing  can  be  argued  from 
their  confessions  of  universal  sin.  Christ  too  tells 
us,  Matth.  11:11,  "Among  them  that  are  born  of 
women,  there  hath  not  risen  a  greater  than  John 
the  Baptist;  notwithstanding,  he  that  is  least  in 
the  kingdom  of  heaven,  (viz.,  the  Gospel  dispen- 
sation,) is  greater  than  he."  This  passage  he  in- 
terprets as  referring  to  a  degree  of  personal  holi' 
ness,  greater  than  belonged  to  any  of  the  ancient 
people  of  God.  But  could  it  have  been  really  the 
opinion  of  Mr.  W.  that  ^the  leasts  or  feeblest  and 
most  imperfect  Christian  in  Gospel  times,  is  a 
more  holy  and  heavenly-minded  person  tlian  were 
David,  and  Job,  and  Isaiah?  Will  any  sensible 
Methodist  avow  such  a  sentiment?  Dr.  Clarke, 
in  his  note  on  the  passage,  says,  "that  it  is  not  in 
holiness  or  devotedness  to  God,  that  the  least  in 
the  kingdom  is  greater  tlian  John,  but  that  it  is 
merely  in  the  diffcroae  of  the  ministry.     The 


ARMINIAN   METHODISM.  185 

testimony  of  this  distinguished  Methodist  is 
true. 

Nor  do  these  great  leaders  of  the  Methodist 
host  harmonize  much  better  in  their  views  of 
James  3  : 2 — *'If  any  man  offend  not  in  word,  the 
same  is  2^  perfect  man."  Wesley  quotes  this  text 
to  prove  the  doctrine  of  "Christian  perfection." 
But  Dr.  Claike  says,  "the  words,  perfect  man^ 
mean,  a  md^n  fully  instructed  in  divine  things — 
an  adult  Christian — one  thoroughly  instructed  in 
the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel."*  And  to  show  con- 
clusively how  absurd  it  is  to  employ  this  text  in 
proof  of 'Christian  perfection,'  Dr.  C.  adds,  "how 
a  man's  cautiousness  in  what  he  says  can  be  a 
proof  that  he  has  every  passion  and  appetite  un- 
der control,  I  cannot  see."  According  to  this,  a 
man  may  indulge  all  the  bad  passions  in  his 
heart — if  he  can  only  manage  to  conceal  them, 
and  not  offend  in  word,  he  is  a  perfect  Chris- 
tian! 

These  distinguished  men^  however,  seem  to 
combine  their  efforts,  when  they  come  to  parry 
the  point  of  the  argument  drawn  from  James  3:2. 
The  substance  of  what  they  have  to  say  is,  "that 
this  text  proves  nothing  against  sinless  perfection, 
although  the  apostle  does  assert,  'in  many  things 
toe  offend  allf  for  if  the  apostle  includes  him»elf 

*  The  meaning  is  the  same  in  Heb.  6:1. 
16 


188  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

in  the  pronoun  we,  he  must  also  include  himself, 
when,  speaking  of  the  tongue,  he  says,  'There- 
with bless  ive  God,  and  therewith  curse  we  men.' 
We  cannot  suppose  James  was  guilty  of  cursing." 
But  a  little  attention  will  show  the  futility  of  this 
reasoning.  In  the  first  passage,  James  says,  "we 
offend  «//,"  or  we  all  oiTend — are  guilty  of  break- 
ing God's  law  in  many  things.  But  James  does 
not  say,  "With  the  tongue  we  all  bless  God,  and 
we  all  curse  men."  Every  one  familiar  with  the 
common  forms  of  speecli,  knows  that  the  pro- 
noun we  is  often  employed  to  denote  a  general 
prevalence  of  any  thing,  or  a  prevailing  tendency, 
or  liability,  among  men.  But  could  the  truth- 
speaking  God  have  said,  that  ^^we  all  sin  in  many 
things,"  if  it  were  true,  that  many  men  do  not 
sin  in  any  thing?  "If  we,"  says  the  last  of  the 
apostles,  "if  we  say  we  have  no  sin,  we  deceive 
ourselves,*  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us." 

*  How  widely  Mr.  Wesley's  views  of  the  danger  of 
eelf-deception  differed  from  those  of  the  apostle,  may  be 
learned  from  the  following-.  Speaking  of  one  of  those 
"mj/jo  fancy  they  have  attained  (to  perfection)  when  they 
have  not,"  he  says,  "but  he  is  deceived.  What  then?  It 
is  a  harmless  mistake,  while  he  feels  nothing  but  love  in 
his  heart.  It  is  a  mistake  which  generaJly  argues 
GREAT  GRACE,  a  high  degree  both  of  holiness  and 
happiness."  In  other  words,  this  ^^sinless  mistake,^^  which 
"needs  the  atoning  blood"  to  cleanse  its  lilthiness,  is  an 
evidence  of  superior  attainments  in  religion!  -See  Wesley 
•u  Christian  Perfection. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  187 

We  will  close  this  investigation  with  the  fol- 
lowing extract  from  Wesley's  Sermons,  which, 
after  what  has  been  said,  will  doubtless  occasion 
both  surprise  and  gratification.  *'With  this  con- 
viction of  the  sin  remaining  in  our  hearts,"  says 
Mr.  W.,  "there  is  joined  a  clear  conviction  of  the 
sin  remaining  in  oUr  lives,  and  cleaving  to  all  our 
words  and  actions.  In  the  best  of  these  we  nov/ 
discern  a  mixture  of  evil,  either  in  the  spirit, 
matter,  or  manner  of  them;  something  that  could 
not  endure  the  righteous  judgment  of  God,  were 
he  extreme  to  mark  what  is  done  amiss.  Where 
we  least  of  all  suspected  it,  we  find  a  taint  of  pride 
or  self-will,  of  unbelief  or  idolatry;  so  that  we  are 
now  lyiore  ashtimed  of  our  best  duties,  than  for- 
merly of  our  worst  sins.  And  hence  we  cannot 
bat  feel,  that  these  are  so  far  from  having  any 
thing  meritorious  in  them — yea,  so  far  from  being 
able  to  stand  in  the  sight  of  the  divine  justice, 
that  for  those  also  we  should  be  guilty  before 
God,  were  it  not  for  the  blood  of  the  covenant." 
Serm.  vol.  1,  p.  212.  You  are  ready,  I  am  per- 
suaded. Rev.  Sir,  to  exclaim  with  me,  "Can  it  be 
possible  that  this  truly  Scriptural  passage  was  dic- 
tated by  the  same  mind,  and  transcribed  by  the 
same  pen  that  originated  the  strange  incoheren- 
cies  of  'sinless  perfection?' "  We  pass  to  the 
sixth  head  of  difficulties. 


188  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

VI.  The  Difficulties  of  Methodism,  with 
reference  to  the  characteristics  of  a 
Genuine  Work  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

She  encourages  her  followers  to  place  much 
confidence  in  certain  wild  and  disorderly  pro- 
ceedings which,  as  they  are  at  an  infinite  remove 
from  the  'reasonable  service'  of  true  piety,  so  are 
they  expressly  condemned  by  the  Wesleys  and 
others,  the  wisest  and  best  of  the  sect.  Refer- 
ence is  here  had  to  those  scenes  of  confusion  so 
common  in  that  denomination — jumping,  falling, 
screaming,  swooning,  shouting  glory,  glory,  glo- 
ry, clapping  the  hands,  &c.  With  these  exer- 
cises, nature  is,  in  frequent  instances,  completely 
exliausted;  the  person  lies  in  a  state  of  collapse 
for  many  hours,  and  is  said  to  be  highly  favored 
with  the  overpowering  influences  of  the  Spirit. 
Some  are  seen  ascending  saplings,  or  whatever 
object  stands  most  convenient,  ''climbing  up  to 
heaven  to  see  Jesus."  Others  are  engaged  in 
laughing,  throwing  back  the  body,  swinging  the 
arms  at  full  sweep,  rolling  on  the  ground,  <fec. 
To  work  the  minds  of  the  people  up  to  such  a 
pitch  of  phrenzy,  (I  can  call  it  nothing  else,)  is 
manifestly  a  principal  object  at  camp-meetings, 
and  a  main  design  of  all  the  machinery  of  enthu- 
siasm employed  upon  such  occasions.     But  let 


ARMIMAN    METHODISM.  1S9 

any  intelligent  reader  of  the  Scriptures  pause  for 
a  moment,  and  ask  himself,  "Where  do  we  find 
examples  of  all  this  in  the  Bible?"  Is  it  in  the 
case  of  Saul  of  Tarsus?  But  even  he  was  not 
bereft  of  his  senses,  or  presence  of  mind;  for  he 
conversed  intelligently  with  Jesus.  Nor  was  he 
converted  until  three  days  after  meeting  with 
Christ  on  the  way  to  Damascus,  when  visited  by 
Ananias  by  divine  direction.  Besides,  let  Meth- 
odism exhibit  the  appearance  of  the  Son  of  God 
in  the  brightness  of  his  glory,  a  similar  miracu- 
lous splendor,  the  same  supernatural  voice,  and 
we  will  believe  her  prostrations  to  be  caused  by 
the  same  power  which  struck  with  consternation 
the  p'^rsecuting  Saul.  Indeed  we  may  safely 
challenge  the  advocates  of  this  system  to  produce 
a  solitary  example  of  conversion,  under  the 
preaching  of  Christ  and  his  apostles,  bearing  even 
a  distant  resemblance  to  the  jumping,  jerking, 
falling  down,  rolling  on  the  ground,  clapping  of 
hands,  loud  laughing,  and  swooning  away  into  a 
senseless  or  pulseless  condition,  which  are  such 
frequent  and  distinguishing  characteristics  of 
Methodism.  But  perhaps  the  Savior  and  his 
apostles  were  not  such  powerful  preachers  as 
some  of  the  present  day!  We  hold  steadfastly 
that  all  true  religion  begins  and  is  carried  on  by 
the  divine  Spirit,  experienced  in  the  heart;  but 
16* 


iOO  THE    DIFFICILTIF.S    OF 

this  is  perfectly  distinct  from  the  natural  agitation 
of  the  passions,  into  which  it  seems  the  object  of 

eMethodist  leaders  to  lash  the  minds  of  their 
members.  "We  can  see  no  divine  power  in  the 
mechanical  groan,  and  the  periodical  'Amen' — 
without  which  they  think  their  meetings  lifeless. 
Nor  is  there  any  evidence  that  Christ  and  the 
apostles  encouraged  those  tumultuous  assemblies 
in  which  numbers  are  at  the  same  moment  utter- 
ing petitions  with  stentorian  voice,  and  others  are 
going-about  among  the  people,  urging  them  to  cry 
out  till  their  nerves  are  wrought  upon  to  screech- 
ing, swooning,  and  various  hysterical  affections. 
When  attempts  are  made  to  impose  this  on  the 
world  for  religion,  serious  Christians  will  be  dis- 
posed to  weep,  and  the  rest  of  mankind  to  laugh." 
(Walker's  Address,  p.  10.) 

It  is  not  intended  to  follow  the  defenders  of 
these  exercises,  in  their  attempts  to  enlist  the 
Bible  in  favor  of  "confusion  and  every  evil  work." 
A  specimen  or  two  of  their  logic,  is  all  that  our 
limits  will  permit.  For  example,  they  quote  a 
number  of  passages  containing  the  words  "rejoice, 
shout,  shout  aloud,"  &;c.;  but  they  forget  that  an 
equal  number  of  texts  may  be  adduced,  exliorting 
"/o  keep  silence^  be  slill,^^  6ic,  The  strong 
imagery  of  such  passages  is  best  explained  by 
others,  siich  as  Psl.  68 :  8 — "The  mountains  and 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  191 

the  hills  shall  break  forth  before  you  into  singing, 
and  all  the  trees  of  the  field  shall  clap  their  hands." 
In  like  manner,  when  they  cite  various  texts 
which  represent  persons  as  "leaping  and  walking, 
leaping  for  joy,  falling  down  on  the  face,"  &c., 
they  have  only  shown,  what  no  one  will  question, 
"that  the  expressions  of  submission,  homage,  and 
reverence,  always  have  been,  and  still  are,  carried 
to  a  great  degree  of  extravagance  in  the  Eastern 
countries."  So  also  dancing  was  a  common  act 
of  devotion  under  the  Old  Testament  dispensa- 
tion— but  did  Christ  and  his  apostles  ever  dance! 
But  perhaps  the  most  singular  specimen  of  rea- 
soning from  Scripture  in  defence  of  these  extrava- 
gancies of  Methodism,  remains  to  be  stated.  A 
writer  refers  to  the  scenes  of  Pentecost,  when 
some  said  of  the  apostles,  "these  men  are  full  of 
new  wine,"  and  sagely  reasons  thus:  "Now,  as 
drunken  men  are  generally  'wild  and  disorderly,' 
there  must  have  been  something  in  the  proceed- 
ings of  those  referred  to,  that  induced  these  be- 
holders to  conclude  they  ivere  drunk!^'  This, 
we  believe,  out-Methodises  Methodism !  The 
apostles  acted  in  such  a  manner  as  led  the  people 
to  think  they  were  drunk!  Camp  and  quarterly 
meetings  will  not  stand  in  the  comparison;  no 
person  ever  suspects  their  extravagance  to  be  the 
fruit  of  intoxication.     But  is  it  possible  this  inter- 


192  Tin:  Diiricri/riKS  ok 

preter  of  Holy  Writ  can  discover  no  other  pre- 
text for  the  charge  of  drunkenness  made  against 
the  apostles,  than  that  they  behaved  as  if  they 
ivere  drimk!  Has  it  eniircly  escaped  iiis  notice 
that  they  were  empowered  to  speak  in  languages 
different  from  their  vernacular  tongue?  And  that 
being  known  as  Jews  of  the  common  sort,  they 
were  supposed  to  be  uttoring  the  incoherent  rav- 
ings of  intemperance,  b)-  those  who  understood 
them  not?  This  solution  is  at  least  rather  more 
respectful  to  that  sacred  impulse  by  which  they 
were  directed,  than  the  supposiiiim  that  the  apos- 
tles acted  like  drunken  men! 
■  The  effects  produced  by  the  tremendous  en- 
ginery  of  conversion,  employed  upon  the  great 
occasions,  are  surprising  only  because  they  are  so 
small.  Preaching,  praying,  singing,  loud  vocife- 
ration, earnest  exhortation,  many  tears — all  min- 
gled together  and  vehemently  enforced  wiih  vio- 
lent gesticulation — great  exhaustion  of  bodily 
strength  and  consequent  derangement  of  the  ner- 
vous system — the  darkness  and  gloom  of  the 
scenery  at  night,  contrasting  with  the  bright  re- 
flection from  numerous  gleaming  fires — the  oft- 
repeated  representation  of  the  judgment  day,  as 
exhibited  in  the  separation  of  those  who  crowd 
the  altar,  from  those  who  are  left  without — these 
and  a  thousand  other  devices  to  strike  the  iniagi- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  193 

nation,  render  it  only  a  matter  of  surprise,  that 
among  the  mixed  multitude  who  flock  to  camp- 
meetings,  so  few  are  sufficiently  deranged  in  body 
and  bewildered  in  mind  to  go  through  the  exer- 
cises of  camp-conversion.  Examples  indeed  are 
not  uncommon  of  persons  being  caught  in  this 
whirlwind  of  the  passions,  and  afterwards  con- 
fessing with  shame  that  they  were  totally  beside 
themselves,  and  knew  not  what  they  were  doing.* 
That  such  measures  are  at  least  as  well  adapted 
to  promote  the  cause  of  error  and  fanaticism,  as 
that  of  truth  and  righteousness,  is  evident.  The 
Rev.  Dr.  Miller,  in  his  letters  to  Presbyterians, 
states  the  fact  "that  one  of  the  far-famed  fanatical 
Unitarians,  called  Chrystians,  boasted  that  he  had 
drawn  at  least  fifty  persons  to  anxious  seats, 
merely  by  the  influence  of  his  own  singing" — an 
agent,  as  is  well  known,  of  vast  power  in  Meth- 
odism. And  there  is  much  reason  to  fear  that  a 
large  proportion  of  what  is  called  mourning  and 
conversion  in  that  denomination,  is  to  be  traced 
to  a  cause  equally  removed  from  "the  truth  as  it 
is  in  Jesus." 

But  what  say  the  wisest  and  best  of  the  frater- 
nity upon  these  subjects?  Mr.  Fletcher,  author 
of  the  Checks,  thus  writes  to  Charles  Wesley, 
under  date  of  Nov.  22d,  1762:    "I  liave  heard 

*  A  case  of  this  kind  came  under  my  own  observation. 


194  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

the  melancholy  news  of  many  of  our  brethren 
overshooting  sober  and  steady  Christianity  in 
London.  Oh!  that  I  coidd  stand  in  the  gap,  and 
by  sacrificing  myself  shut  this  immense  abyss  of 
enthusiasm.  The  corruption  of  the  best  things 
is  the  worst  of  corruptions.  Allowing  but  half  of 
the  report  is  true,  the  rest  shows  that  spiritual 
pride,  presumption,  arrogance,  stubbornness, 
party  spirit,  uncharitableness,  prophetic  mis- 
takes— in  short,  every  sinew  of  enthusiasm  is  at 
work  in  many  of  that  body."  The  following  are 
the  words  of  Charles  Wesley  upon  the  same  sub- 
ject: "To-day,  one  came,  M'ho  was  pleased  to  fall 
into  a  fit  for  my  entertainment.  He  beat  himself 
heartily.  I  thought  it  a  pity  to  hinder  him;  so 
instead  of  singing  over  him,  as  had  often  been 
done,  we  left  him  to  recover  at  his  leisure.  A  girl 
as  she  began  to  cry,  I  ordered  to  be  carried  out. 
Her  convulsions  were  so  violent  as  to  take  aivay 
the  use  of  her  limbs,  till  they  laid  her  ivithout  at 
the  door,  when  she  immediately  found  her  legs 
and  ivalked  off.  Some  very  unslill  sisters,  who 
all  took  care  to  stand  near  me,  and  tried  who  could 
cry  the  loudest,  have  been  as  quiet  as  lambs, 
since  I  have  had  them  removed  out  of  my  sight. 
The  first  night  I  preached  tliere,  half  my  words 
were  lost  through  their  ontcries.  Last  night  I 
gave  public  notice,  that  whosoever  cried  so  as  to 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  19 

drown  my  voice,  should  be  quietly  carried  to  the 
furthest  corner  of  the  room.  But  my  porter  had 
no  employ  the  whole  night."  Would  Charles 
Wesley  have  spoken  thus,  if  he  had  considered 
these  things  the  tokens  of  a  work  of  God? 

The  sentiments  of  John  Wesley  upon  the  same 
subject  may  be  learned  from  the  following  ex- 
tracts from  his  writings.  Speaking  of  the  Welch, 
he  says,  "Some  give  out  a  verse,  which  they 
sing  over  and  over  again  with  all  their  might, 
thirty  or  forty  times.  Meanwhile  £:ome  are  vio- 
lently agitated,  and  they  leap  up  and  down  in  all 
'manner  of  postures  for  hours.^^  He  adds,  "I 
think  there  needs  no  great  penetration  to  under- 
stand this.  'I'hey  are  honest,  upright  men,  who 
really  feel  the  love  of  God  in  their  hearts;  but 
they  have  litde  experience  either  of  the  ways  of 
God  or  of  the  devices  of  Satan.  So  he  (Satan) 
serves  himself  of  their  siinplicity,  in  order  to 
ivear  them  out  and  to  bring  discredit  on  the 
work  of  God.^^ 

Again:  'J'he  Rev.  John  Wesley,  in  the  fifth 
volume  of  his  Journal,  says,  "Many  have  been 
awakened,  justified,  and  perfected  in  love;  but 
even  while  full  of  love,  SATAN  drives  many  of 
them  to  extravagance.  This  appears  in  several 
instances:  1st.  Frequently  //irce  or  four,  yea, 
ten  or  twelve,  PRAY    ALOUD   together.    2d. 


106  THE    DIFFICULTIES   OF 

Some,  perhaps  many,  scream  altogether  as  loud 
as  they  possibly  can;  several  drop  down  as  dead^ 
and  are  as  stiff  as  a  corpse,  but  in  a  while  they 
start  up  and  cry  GLORY,  GLORY,  perhaps 
twenty  times  together.  Just  so  (he  adds)  do  the 
French  prophets,  and  very  lately  the  jumpers  in 
Wales,  bring  the  real  work  into  contempt.''^ 

Again:  Mr.  Wesley  objects  to  such  bodily  ex- 
ercises on  the  score  of  decency.  In  his  sermon, 
on  "knowing  Christ  after  the  flesh,"  he  remarks, 
*'But  some  may  say,  refraining  from  these  warm 
expressions  may  check  the  fervor  of  devotion.  It 
is  very  possible  it  may,  such  fervor  as  has  passed 
for  devotion.  It  may  prevent  loud  shoutings 
horrid  unnatural  screaming,  repeating  the  same 
words  twenty  or  thirty  times,  jumping  two  or 
three  feet  high,  throwing  about  the  legs  and  arms 
of  men  and  women,  not  only  shocking  to  religion 
but  to  common  decency.'  Cut  it  will  never  check, 
much  less  prevent,  true  Scriptural  devotion." 
Serm.  vol.  3,  p.  266.  What  would  Mr.  Wesley 
have  said,  could  he  have  attended  some  of  our 
Methodist  meetings,  especially  our  camp-meet- 
ings, where  all  these  phenomena,  accounted  by 
him  disorderly,  and  the  work  of  the  deviU  are 
confidently  taken  by  his  professed  followers  to  be 
indubitable  evidence  of  the  power  of  God?  On 
the  subject  of  the  indecency  of  these  things,  an- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  197 

Other  of  the  Methodist  Society  declares,  "I  my- 
self have  actually  witnessed  an  unconsciousness 
of  the  most  indelicate  female  attitudes,  even  in  the 
house  of  God.'*  These  facts,  Rev.  Sir,  and 
others  of  the  same  or  equal  authenticity,  which 
we  suppress,  are  not  reported  by  the  slanderers 
of  Methodism,  but  by  her  decided  friends  and  ad- 
vocates. They  are  now  publislied  with  feelings 
very  different  from  those  of  pleasure;  hut  the  im- 
perious demands  of  truth  seem  to  require  the  full 
exposure  of  this  corrupt  system.  It  would  be 
easy  to  quote  much  more  at  Inrne  from  their  own 
standard  authors,  in  condemnation  of  some  of 
tlieir  favorite  usages.  Let  intelligent  Methodists 
consult  the  following  references,  if  they  would 
furtber  learn  the  sentiments  of  the  father  and 
founder  of  their  system,  with  regard  to  hodily 
exercises  and  agitations  in  the  solemn  business  of 
devotion — viz.,  vol.  I,  p.  5.  9;  vol.2,  pp.  69,67; 
vol.  3,  p.  443 — of  the  Miscellaneous  Works  of 
Wesley.  From  these  and  other  passages,  they 
will  perceive  that  he  ascribes  every  thing  of  this 
sort  to  the  agency  of  the  evil  one,  and  most  ex- 
pressly disavows  his  belief  in  these  extnvagan- 
cies,  as  the  fruits  of  a  work  of  the  Spirit.*     Let 

*  It  has  been  suggested  that  Wesley,  at  one  period  of 
bis  life,  "patronized  almost  gvctj  species  of  disorder  in 
public  worship,"  even  "when  in  England  it  was  carried 

17 


198  THE    Dirr'CULTIES    OJ' 

them  ponder,  too,  the  caution  contained  in  his 
tract  on  Christian  Perfection — "Give  no  place  to 
a  heated  imagination.  Do  not  easily  suppose 
dreams,  voices,  impressions,  visions,  to  be  from 
God.  They  may  be  from  him ;  they  may  be 
from  nature;  they  may  be  from  the  devil.'"  "You 
are  in  danger  of  enthusiasm  every  hour,  if  you 
despise  or  lightly  esteem  reason,  knowledge,  or 
human  learning;  every  one  of  which  is  an  excel- 
lent gift  of  God,  and  may  serve  the  noblest  pur- 
poses." Doct.  Tracts,  p.  353.  And  let  it  check 
that  fond  dependence  upon  imaginary  visions  and 
voices  from  above,  on  which  so  many  build  their 
hopes  of  divine  acceptance,  to  know  that  by  the 
same  test  the  author*  of  one  of  the  worst  produc- 
tions of  infidelity,  has  claimed  the  seal  of  heaven 
to  his  profane  speculations. 

Nor  is  the  judgment  of  the  greatest  of  modern 
Methodists  at  all  more  favorable  to  these  depart- 
ures  from    Scriptural    simplicity   and   sobriety. 

to  its  greatest  extremes."  But  like  a  celebrated  dignitary 
of  the  English  church,  who  in  Iiis  early  life  wrote  against 
Episcopacy,  though  Wesley  may  have  abandoned  his  for- 
mer opinions,  we  believe  he  never  solidly  refuted  them. 
We  respectfully  submit  therefore  that  his  change  of  mind 
or  of  practice,  in  regard  to  disorders  in  public  worship, 
does  not  invalidate  his  testimony  against  them. 

*  Lord  Herbert.  See  "Leiand'a  View  of  the  Deistical 
Writers,"  p.  20. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  19 

Dr.  Adam  Clarke's  preaching  is  thus  described 
by  Lorenzo  Dow  in  his  Journal  of  July  20,  1 806; 
*'The  sermon  was  well  delivered  in  speech, 
though  there  appeared  much  deadness  at  the  be- 
ginning; but  in  his  last  prayer  he  grew  somewhat 
fervent,  until  God  began  to  send  down  his  power, 
and  there  began  a  move  among  the  people,  when 
he  seemed  to  lower,  as  if  to  ivard  off  the  move 
and  prevent  NOISE."  *  These  are  understood 
to  be  the  prevailing  feeling  and  practice  among 
the  Methodists  of  Great  Britain.  It  is  also  well 
known  that  the  intelligent  and  well  informed 
every  where  are  almost  entirely  exempt  from 
these  bodily  agitations.  ^'Charles  Wesley  and 
John  Fletcher  were  converted  at  their  own  bed- 
side and  alone:  John  Wesley  while  sitting  in  a 
church  hearing  the  reading  of  Luther's  preface  to 
the  Romans :  Dr.  Coke  in  his  pulpit  while 
preaching  to  others.  Both  Charles  Wesley  and 
John  Fletcher  say  they  felt  no  great  emotions  of 

*  Lorenzo  also  bears  the  following  testimony:  "I  saw 
Adam  Clarke — he  acknowledged  to  me  that  he  was  once 
in  the  spirit  of  the  great  revival  in  Cornwall,  &lc.  'But 
now,'  said  the  Dr.,  '/  see  belter.''  His  mind  was  made  up 
against  the  camp-meetings  in  America  as  being  impro- 
per, and  the  revival  attending  them  as  a  thing  account, 
able  upon  natural  principles."  With  respect  to  NOISE 
in  public  worship,  it  seems  "  the  English  connexion  in 
general  are  determined  to  prevent  it,  as  appears  from  their 
conduct  and  publication  in  their  magazine."  See  Journal 
pf  Lorenzo  Dow, 


300  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

joy;  and  Dr.  Coke  and  John  Wesley  were  so 
tranquil,  that  none  but  themselves  were  at  the 
time  acquainted  with  the  change."  Such  is  the 
decided  testimony  of  the  early  fathers  and  best 
friends  of  the  system,  against  the  very  abuses 
which  are  in  this  country  boldly  published  and 
propagated  as  Christianity;  as  in  fact  tlie  essence 
and  highest  excellence  of  that  religion,  which  is 
the  noblest  oflspring  of  Him  who  is  "a  God  of 
order  and  not  of  confusion."  We  scarcely  need 
notice  the  feeble  attempt  which  has  been  made  to 
invalidate  this  testimony,  by  alleging  the  frequent 
examples  of  reformation  from  gross  vice,  in  con- 
nection with  these  abuses.  The  fanatical  Unita- 
rians, called  ChrySiians,  at  their  great  meetings, 
have  their  mourners'  benclffes,  women  pray  in 
])ublic,*  old  backsliders  are  reclaimed,  and 
drunkards    reformed.     Do    these    results    stamp 

*  The  Methodists,  as  is  well  known,  encourag-e  their 
women  to  pray  and  exhort  in  their  public  assemblies.  Tiic 
following  is  Wesley's  comment  on  1  Cor.  14  :34,  35.  "Let 
your  women  keep  silence  in  the  church,"  Alc.  "//  ?s  a 
shame  Ibr  women  /o  speak  in  the  church."  "Robt.  Bare- 
lay  indeed  says,  'Paul  here  only  reproves  the  inconsidc. 
rate  and  talkative  icomcn.''  But  the  text  sai/s  no  such 
thing.  It  cvidenily  speaks  o^  women  in  general.  Again: 
The  apostle  Paul  saith  to  'J'itnothy,  'I<et  )'our  wouien 
learn  in  silence  with  all  subjection:  For  I  suffer  not  a 
woman  to  teach,  nor  to  usurp  authority  over  the  man, 
(which  public  teaching  necessarily  implies,)  but  to  be  in 
silence'  "   1  Tim.  2:11,  12.     Barclay  replies,  "We  tliink 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  201 

error  and  extravagance  with  the  image  of  truth, 
or  sanction  the  denial  of  the  supreme  divinity  of 
Him  who  is  "  God  over  all  blessed  for  ever- 
more?" 

this  not  repugnant  to  this  (our)  doctrine."  "Not  repug- 
nant," retorts  Wesley — "I  do  not  suffer  a  woman  to  teach? 
Then  I  know  not  what  is."  See  Wesley's  Letter  to  a 
Quaker. 

17* 


20?  THE    DirriCL'LTIEa    OF 


LETTER    ¥1. 

Camp   Meetings.     Abuses  of  Religious   Ordi- 
nances. 

Rev.  Sir; 

We  come  next  to  remark  upon  that  which 
may  be  denominated  the  great  pillar  of  Methodist 
influence  among  men. 

VII.  The  Difficulties  of  Methodism  in  con- 
nection WITH    Camp  Meetings. 

It  is  not  intended  to  represent  as  unlawful  the 
mere  act  of  worship  in  the  open  air  or  in  the 
woods.  On  the  contrary,  we  freely  admit  that 
there  often  occur  exigencies  in  the  history  of  the 
church,  which  render  such  a  practice  highly  com- 
mendable. Often  have  the  people  of  God,  in 
days  gone  by,  been  driven  to  the  dens  and  caves 
of  the  earth,  that  they  might  enjoy  the  privilege 
of  assembling  in  some  of  nature's  thick  recesses, 
to  worship  the  God  of  the  whole  earth  agreeably 
to  the  dictates  of  reason  and  conscience.  And 
there  are  doubtless  many  situations  in  free  and 
civilized  countries,  where  the  homage  due  to  the 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  203 

King  of  heaven  may  and  ought  to  ascend  unitedly 
from  the  great  congregation,  even  where  no  tem- 
ple nor  altar  is  dedicated  to  the  service.  We  may 
even  advance  a  step  further:  There  is  something 
both  sublime  and  beautiful,  in  thus  employing  the 
green  earth  and  the  dazzling  canopy  of  heaven, 
as  a  temple  for  the  praise  of  Him  who  hath  said, 
"Heaven  is  my  throne,  and  the  earth  my  foot- 
stool," and  whom  "the  heaven,  even  the  heaven 
of  heavens,  cannot  contain." 

Why  then  do  we  protest  against  Methodist 
camp-meetings? 

1.  Because  they  aiTord  to  the  mixed  multitude 
who  attend  them,  unnsual  and  most  abundant  ad- 
vantages for  the  practice  of  wickedness  in  many 
of  its  foulest  forms.  It  is  well  known  that  whilst 
the  mass  of  the  steady,  orderly,  and  influential 
men  of  the  community,  who  give  tone  to  society, 
and  impart  a  healthfid  direction  to  the  current  of 
its  manners  and  customs,  take  little  or  no  interest 
in  such  assemblages,  seldom  attend,  and  then  for 
a  very  short  time — on  the  other  hand,  persons 
of  almost  every  shade  of  color  and  character  are 
advertised,  invited,  and  expected  to  attend;  and  it 
is  of  these  for  the  most  part  that  Methodism  cal- 
culates her  gain.  It  is  not  meant  that  persons  of 
this  description  should  not  have  the  Gospel 
preached  to  them.    That  is  not  the  question.    *'Is 


204  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

tlie  camp-meeting  the  best  method  of  bringing 
them  under  the  purifying  influence  of  the  Gos- 
pel?" Prove  this — and  then  the  more  you  can 
crowd  together  on  the  camp-ground  the  better. 
But  is  it  the  wisest  way  to  make  such  men  holy, 
to  press  them  together  for  several  days  in  succes- 
sion, and  several  nights,  too,  where  as  "  iron 
sharpenelh  iron,"  and  fire  kindleth  fire,  and  de- 
pravity stimulates  to  sin,  so  the  social  principle 
and  the  combined  energies  of  vice  excite  to  emu- 
lation in  deeds  of  enormous  wickedness?  Is  it 
the  best  way  to  bring  logetlior  in  dangerous  com- 
bination for  many  days  and  nights,  men  and  wo- 
m3n  in  mixed  multitudes,  where,  it  cannot  be  de- 
nied, great  facilities  are  presented,  to  kindle  un- 
holy fires  in  the  soul,  and  practice  iniquity  in 
many  of  its  vilest  shapes? 

2.  For  let  it  be  remembered  that  these  meet- 
ings are  generally  held  in  places  remote  from  the 
habitations  of  men,  frequently  at  the  foot  of  a 
mountain — always  in  the  woods;  that  the  night 
is  the  time  of  general  leisure  from  worldly  avo- 
cations— the  time,  too,  when  the  excitement  at 
the  camp  is  highest — the  attention  of  the  mana- 
gers is  then  most  confined  to  the  exclusive  scenes 
of  the  meeting — and  the  best  opportunities  are 
then  afTorded  by  the  surrounding  darkness  for  the 
"workers  of  iniquity  to  hide  themselves;"  that 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  205 

hundreds  flock  to  such  places  for  mirth  and 
recreation,  and  many  for  much  worse  purposes; 
that  independently  of  the  indecent  postures,  (spo- 
ken of  by  Wesley  and  others,)  and  besides  the 
malign  influence  of  protracted  intercourse,  the 
accommodations  for  lodging  at  night  are  such  as 
will  commend  themselves  to  no  modest  person-, 
particularly  to  no  modest  female,  as  can  easily  be 
shown  by  a  reference  to  facts.  These  and  many 
other  things  plainly  show  that  these  meetings  are 
not  sanctioned  by  good  sense  or  sound  morality, 
much  less  by  that  religion  which  forbids  the  very 
♦'appearance  of  evil."  And  when  we  add  the 
awful  profanation  of  the  holy  Sabbath,  occasioned 
by  the  rush  of  hundreds  from  every  quarter,  as  to 
the  festal  scenes  of  a  holy-day,  or  to  the  merri- 
ment and  dissipation  of  some  great  fair,  well  may 
the  serious  Chri.^tian  pause  and  ask,  "Can  these 
things  be  duty  in  a  land  like  this,  where  every 
neigliborhood  has  or  may  soon  have  a  convenient 
house  of  worship,  at  which,  by  travelling  a  short 
distance,  all  may  receive  instruction  in  the  won- 
drous mysteries  of  redeeming  love?"  Surely  it 
cannot  be  a  work  of  necessity  in  any  sense,  to 
mingle  vv'ith  the  worship  of  the  Lord  of  glory, 
any  thing  which  bears  so  strong  a  resemblance 
to  the  works  of  darkness.  If  indeed  the  system 
were  so  amended,  that  camp-meetings  should  be 


200  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

held  for  males  and  females  separately,  at  different 
times  and  places,  and  were  never  to  extend  to 
the  Sabbath,  many  of  the  above  objections  would 
be  removed.  But  under  the  application  of  so 
powerful  a  remedy,  we  greatly  fear  the  patient 
would  expire  in  our  hands;  camp-meetings  would 
be  no  more  !  * 

*  The  writer  thinks  proper  to  remark  in  this  connexion, 
that  he  does  not  decide  upon  the  expediency  or  inexpe- 
diency of  camp-mectin<js  in  our  new  settlements,  and 
when  properly  conducted.  The  foregoing  discussion  has 
reference  mainly  to  the  practice  of  holding  these  meetings 
in  the  vicinity  of  cities,  and  large  villages,  and  in  neigh- 
borhoods long  settled,  and  furnished  with  many  churches, 
and  other  conveniences,  for  the  orderly  worship  of  God. 
Their  propriety  among  a  sparse  population,  destitute  of 
suitable  house*  of  worship,  would  depend  in  a  great  mea- 
sure upon  their  management.  But  we  are|  persuaded 
there  can  be  no  sufficient  plea  for  such  assemblages  under 
otlicr  circumstances,  such  as  we  have  mentioned.  This 
view  of  the  subject  will  also  show  the  propriety  of  the 
remarks  we  have  m.ade  upon  the  method  of  lodging  at 
night.  The  "log  cabins"  of  the  far  West  are  designed  to 
be  only  a  temporary  arrangement,  to  yield  with  all  pos- 
sible speed  to  better  accommodations.  Necessity  in  such 
cases  knows  no  law.  But  we  should  all  feel  the  indeli- 
cacy, not  to  say  indecency,  o^  voluntarily  forsaking  sepa- 
rate chambers,  to  hudtlle  male  and  llinale  into  the  same 
apartment;  and  all  from  the  fervor  of  our  zeal  for  religion, 
and  the  salvation  of  souls!  Paul  was  himself  a  '■'■  lent, 
maker."  And  though  they  had  no  churches  to  assemble 
in,  we  hear  of  his  preaching  on  "Mars  Hill,"  in  an  "upper 
chamber,"  in  his  own  "hired  room,"  and  in  an  oratory  by 
the  river  side;  but  never  do  we  read  of  his  employing  his 
mechanical  skill  to  furnisli  a  camp-ground,  nor  that  he 
ever  sanctioned  any  similar  practice, 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  207 

It  will  not  satisfy  the  minds  of  any  but  those 
who  are  already  the  partial  friends  of  the  system, 
to  suffer  passion  to  usurp  the  throne  of  reason, 
and  apply  harsh  epithets  to  the  foregoing  state- 
ment of  facts.  But  as  some  have  been  disposed 
to  charge  the  author  of  these  paragraphs  with  a 
breach  of  decorum,  he  can  only  take  the  liberty 
of  reminding  his  accusers,  that  "a  polluted  imagi- 
nation is  the  keenest  detector  and  the  most  severe 
ji:dge  of  impurities  in  style,  as  the  slightest  im- 
age on  hint  excites  a  fermentation  of  which  it 
is  instantly  conscious,  and  the  guilt  of  which 
it  charges  on  the  innocent  occasion."  (Prof. 
M'Clelland.) 

In  concluding  these  remarks  upon  the  abuses 
engrafted  on  the  errors  of  Methodism,  let  us 
glance  for  a  moment  at  their  practical  impression 
upon  the  church  and  the  world.  And  here  I  am 
happy  to  have  the  privilege  of  embodying  in  this 
discussion,  some  very  able  and  just  observations 
from  the  'Christian  Advocate,'  edited  by  the  vene- 
rable Dr.  Green  of  Philadelphia. 

1.  The  kind  of  preaching  which  we  have  de- 
scribed, and  the  object  intended  thereby,  make 
but  small  demand  for  talent  or  education  in  the 
Christian  ministry.  Hence  vigorous,  discrimin- 
ating intellect,  and  a  tact  for  sound  instruction  in 
the  pulpit,  are   thrown   into   the  shade,  and  are 


20S  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

compelled  to  yield  tlie  precedence  to  empty  vo- 
ciferation. '*Ilut  all  history  bears  its  testimony 
to  the  deplorable  efiecis  of  an  iinqnalified  minis- 
try. Incompetent  teacliers  of  religion  have  ever 
been  the  scourge  of  the  ciiurch,  the  ab.ettors  of 
error,  the  tools  of  wily  ecclesiastics  and  politi- 
cians, and  at  once  the  viclinis  and  supporters  of 
superstition  and  fanaticism.  And  in  the  face  of 
all  this  ligiit  and  evidence,  the  Met!:odists,  as  a 
body,  are  the  stern  advocates  of  an  untaught 
ministry." 

2.  "Another  of  their  evil  eiTects  upon  tlie 
church  arises  from  the  little  valitc  they  set  irpon 
Christian  instruction  in  any  of  its  dcjartments. 
Their  system  is  formed  mainly  with  reference  to 
the  passions.  Their  preaching,  praymg,  classes, 
camp-meetings,  and  love-feasts,  are  all  conducted 
so  as  to  affect  the  passions.  As  respects  instruc- 
tion, a  moral  famine  pervades  every  thing  they 
do.  This  might  be  expected  from  the  character 
of  a  large  majority  of  their  clergy.*     A  person 

*  Wesley  himself  assorts — "Wore  I  to  preach  three 
years  tog^ether  in  one  place,  bolli  tlie  pco[)le  and  myself 
would  grow  as  dead  as  stones."  We  may  we  1  suspect  tlic 
piety  that  would  die  under  a  three-years'  trial  ot'  this 
kind.  Whatever  benefits  accrue  amonsr  the  Methodists 
from  "the  constant  change  of  preachers,"  it  is  certain  that 
it  lays  a  strong  temptation  in  the  way  of  the  preacher  to 
neglect  the  iniprovement  of  his  mind,  after  he  has  jyone 
throxigh  a  sufficiently  extensive  course  of  sermons — which 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  209 

professes  conversion  to-day,  and  is  admitted  to 
the  communion  to-morrow;  and  thus  the  <•  urch 
is  filled  with  ignorant  members;  ignorant  of  the 
Bible,  and  in  a  very  lamentable  degree  of  the 
plan  of  salvation.  And  their  example  is  exerting' 
a  deleterious  influence  upon  other  portions  of  the 
church.  Other  denominations,  to  prevent  their 
adherents  from  becoming  Methodists,  '■where  they 
can  get  religion  so  easily,''  admit  them  to  mem- 
bership too  hastily." 

3.  "Another  of  the  evil  effects  of  Methodism 
upon  the  church  is,  the  perverted  taste  it  creata 
for  hearing  the  word  of  God. 

"Such  a  taste  have  they  created  for  clamorous 
preaching,  that  now  they  will  be  satisfied  with 
nothing  else.  The  great  object  of  preaching 
surely  is,  to  elucidate  and  explain  the  word  of 
God,  and  to  bring  it  home  to  the  heart  and  con- 
science. If  in  the  sacred  and  divine  institution  of 
preaching,  a  calm,  deliberate,  rational,  and  pun- 
gent exposition  of  the  Scriptures,  is  to  give  way 
to  the  narration  of  experience,  and  of  wonderful 

he  is  at  liberty  to  repeat  at  each  successive  chang-e  of  his 
circuit.  The  people  too  will  be  fed  witli  milk,  milk,  milk. 
They  will  not  be  instructed  to  leani  the  principles  of 
Christian  doctr  ne.  Any  tiling  like  systematic  discussion 
of  the  gr^at  truths  oi'  tiic  Scriptures  in  their  connected 
order,  is  almost  entirely  out  oi"  the  question.  Abundant 
facts  testify  to  the  truth  of  these  remarke. 

18 


210  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

incidents  and  anecdotes,  often  to  the  veriest  rant 
and  bombast,  what  is  to  become  of  the  church?  If 
the  Scriptures  cease  to  shine  from  the  pulpit,  what 
is  to  enlighten  the  people?" 

4.  "But  what  is  perliaps  the  greatest  evil  of 
Methodism  is  yet  to  be  named.  1  mean  its  ef- 
fect in  begetting  improper  notions  of  divine 
truth:' 

*'In  regard  to  the  production  of  proper  religious 
feeling,  the  influence  exerted  upon  the  heart  and 
conscience,  by  our  views  of  divine  truth,  is  most 
extensive  and  powerful.  How  deplorable,  then, 
the  extension  which  is  given  to  views  and  notions 
based  on  clouds  and  borne  up  by  vapors,  which 
vanish  into  thin  air  before  the  light  of  reason  and 
Scripture!  Among  the  Methodists  there  is  very 
much  religious  irreverence,  arising  no  doubt  from 
their  improper  views  of  the  divine  character. 
Hence  their  boisterous  and  unmeaning  prayers — 
the  great  familiarity  with  which  they  treat  the 
Most  High — their  crude  notions  of  'getting  reli- 
gion,' and  of  sinless  perfection.  They  seem  to 
suppose  that  religion  can  be  obtained  and  lost  at 
any  time — that  it  consists  in  a  boisterous  agitation 
of  the  passions — that  other  means  than  prayer 
and  the  avoidance  of  temptation,  are  to  be  em- 
ployed in  overcoming  the  devil — and  tliat  reve- 
rence and  order  in  religious  worship  are  the  char- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  811 

acteristics  of  coldness  and  formality.  A  man  of 
my  acquaintance  a  few  years  since,  cried  out,  in. 
an  evening  meeting  among  tlie  Methodists — 
*Brethren,  I  have  got  the  devil,  and  will  not  let 
him  go  till  I  kill  him.'  lie  continued  fisting  his 
Satanic  majesty  against  the  wall  for  half  an  hour, 
whilst  the  cries  of  *Amen'  and  *Glory  to  God'  . 
were  rising  ail  around  him." 

5.  But  what  impression  do  these  and  similar 
traits  of  the  system  make  upon  the  world?  "A 
man  of  intelligence  is  prompted  by  curiosity  to 
attend  one  of  the  boisterous  camp-meetings.  He 
goes  from  tent  to  tent,  from  one  praying  circle  to 
another.  He  witnesses  the  fervid  enthusiasm  of 
the  preachers,  which  acts  upon  the  mass  like  a 
whirlwind  upon  the  ocean.  He  sees  some  falling 
into  fits — others  exhausted  with  shouting — others 
prostrate  on  the  earth  and  crying  out,  'it  made 
no  matter  to  them  whether  they  went  to  heaven 
head  or  heels  foremost' — a  scene  actually  wit- 
nessed. He  hears  twenty  or  thirty  praying  at 
once,  and  the  less  fluent  brothers  and  sisters 
shouting  *Amen.'  He  hears  one  exclaim,  'I  see 
the  Savior — there  he  is ;  and  another,  'I  see 
heaven  open  and  God  preparing  to  descend  to  us;* 
and  another  crying  out,  *Pray  on,  brothers  and 
sisters — the  blessing  will  soon  come.'  He  wit- 
nesses little  else  but  irreverence  before  Him  who 


812  THE    BifFICULTIES   OF 

hath  said,  'The  Lord  is  in  his  holy  temple;  let  all 
the  earth  keep  silence  before  him.'  If  such  scenes 
are  not  well  calculated  to  make  the  impression 
that  religion  is  only  fitted  for  the  vulgar — that  it 
is  all  a  matter  of  blind  superstition,  I  know  not 
what  scenes  are."  That  the  foregoing  statements 
do  not  exceed  or  exaggerate  the  simple  truth,  is 
proved  by  Dr.  Green,  who  affirms  that  they  are 
in  "exact  accordance  with  the  reports  which  were 
made  to  him  from  various  quarters.*'  The  facts 
were  such  as  "had  either  passed  under  the  obser- 
vation of  the  reporters,  or  were  narrated  by  credit- 
able and  pious  individuals." 

6.  While  therefore  we  cheerfully  concede  to 
the  Methodists  the  credit  which  is  due  them  for 
conveying  a  measure  of  religious  and  moral  in- 
struction to  a  large  class  of  mankind,  including 
many  of  the  most  depraved  and  destitute,  we  can- 
not but  fear  that  the  foregoing  errors  and  disor^ 
ders  are  exerting  an  influence  upon  society  which 
is  any  thing  but  salutary.  Religion  will  generally 
be  estimated  by  the  character  and  conduct  of  her 
professed  followers.  And  when  the  worship  of 
the  God  of  the  whole  earth,  the  infinitely  perfect 
Spirit,  the  only  object  of  religious  homage,  is  so 
widely  at  variance  with  the  plainest  dictates  of 
propriety;  when  instead  of  that  "reasonable  ser- 
vice" which  He  requires,  extravagance  and  con- 


AR  MINI  AN    METHODISM.  213 

fusion  prevail;  when  long  and  noisy  vociferation 
is  substituted  for  instruction  in  religions  truth; 
when  the  object  is  rather  to  rouse  the  animal  sen- 
sibilities than  awaken  the  conscience,  enlighten 
the  understanding,  and  humble  the  heart;  when 
those  in  numberless  instances  are  appointed  to 
teach  wlio  ought  first  to  learn,*  and  the  most  in- 
congruous statements  are  gravely  announced  as 
the  sober  conclusions  of  reason  and  truth;  when 
the  results  of  natural  causes,  terror,  nervous  irri- 
tability, bodily  exhaustion,  &c.,  are  boldly  pro- 
nounced to  be  essentials  in  that  "holiness  without 
which  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord:"  when  all  this, 
(and  there  is  much  more  of  the  same  character,) 
is  witnessed  by  men  of  even  ordinary  discern- 
ment, nothing  is  more  easy  and  natural  than  to 
transfer  their  feelings  of  disgust  from  those  who 

*  The  example  of  the  disciples:,  "a  few  illiterate  fisher- 
men," is  sometimes  adduced  in  favor  of  an  unlearned 
ministry.  But  it  seems  to  be  overlooked,  that  those ^^'s/icr- 
men  had  received,  besides  miraculous  powers,  and  ths 
inspiration  of  the  Most  H0I3',  three  full  years  of  iiistrvc- 
tion  from  the  lips  of  "the  I'eacher  gent  from  God;"'  the 
very  best  of  all  training  for  the  ministry.  Bet'idcs,  Paul 
exhorts  Timothy,  who,  if  not  himself  inspired,  seems  to 
have  possessed  some  extraordinary  g'iu-s  and  endowments: 
"Cive  attendance  to  reading-,"  ^'■Study  to  show  thyselt 
approved  unto  Gcd,  a  \yorkman  that  needeth  )jot  to  bs 
ashamed,  rightly  dividing  the  word  of  God."  1  Tim.  4:13. 
2  Tim.  2:15.  These  texts  give  no  countenance  to  th« 
doctrine  of  preaching  without  preparatory  study.  And 
the  example  of  the  eleven,  is  its  total  overthrow. 
18* 


tl4  THE    DlFnCtTLTIBS    OF 

practice  these  abuses  of  religion,  to  religion  her- 
lelf.  *'\Vhere  the  Methodist  religion,"  says  the 
Christian  Advocate,  "has  been  for  any  time  preva- 
lent, unchecked  by  the  presence  of  other  denomi- 
nations, you  find  the  talented  and  influential  mem- 
bers of  society  opposed  not  only  to  the  Method- 
ists, but  to  every  thing  in  the  form  of  godliness." 
"The  region  in  which  I  live,"  continues  the  same 
writer,  "bears  a  decided  testimony  to  the  truth  of 
this  fact.  Methodism  was  once  dominant.  It 
carried  nearly  every  thing  before  it;  and  now  the 
intelligent  and  influential  are  generally  infidels, 
or  something  as  bad,  and  are  rarely  ever  seen 
within  the  walls  of  a  church.  Methodism  is  on 
the  wane.  The  people  are  becoming  tired  of  it; 
and  that  cold  chill,  the  sure  precursor  of  spiritual 
death,  is  pervading  the  whole  community."  "If 
this  be  religion,"  exclaimed  one  who  was  leaving 
the  scenes  of  a  camp-ground,  "Heaven  preserve 
me  from  it."  As  the  scandalous  conduct  of  the 
Romish  clergy  has  left  an  eternal  stain  and  stigma 
upon  the  very  name  of  priest,  so  have  we  reason 
to  fear,  will  much  that  Methodism  calls  religion, 
prejudice  the  minds  and  steel  the  henrts  of  thou- 
sands against  the  pure  and  heavenly  doctrines  of 
Divine  Revelation. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  21  5 

VIII.    The  Difficulties  of  Methodism,  with    regard 
TO    Religious    Ordinances.      The    Gross    Abuses 

PRACTISED    IN    THAT    DENOMINATION. 

1.  Upon  this  subject  the  theory  and  practice 
of  Methodism  seem  very  well  to  agree.  What 
are  we  fo  think  of  "Articles  and  Discipline," 
which  after  stating  that  the  baptism  of  children  is 
to  be  retained  in  the  church,  contain  not  one  word 
respecting  the  character  of  the  parents;  and  which 
of  course  require  nothing  more,  in  order  to  the 
baptism  of  their  children,  from  the  most  profane 
and  vicious,  than  from  the  most  moral  and  reli- 
gious ?  The  whole  subject  is  left  as  though  it 
were  a  matter  of  the  utmost  indifference.  No  ob- 
ligations of  any  kind  are  prescribed;  no  inquiry 
of  knowledge  or  of  decent  deportment ;  no  de- 
mand of  future  obedience  to  the  divine  precepts. 
The  great  point  scejns  to  be,  to  get  children  bap- 
tized, and  as  many  as  possible  by  the  Methodist 
church,  with  which  tlie  parents  are  thus  brought 
into  a  kind  of  connexion  and  membership.  On 
the  principle  that  "  coming  to  us  "  is  to  "  get  reli- 
gion "  with  almost  as  great  certainty,  as  to  unite 
with  others  is  to  be  destitute  of  it,  this  method  of 
attaching  persons  of  every  description  to  the 
meeting  is  adopted  without  scruple ;  and  doubt- 
less the  end  will  fully  justify  the  means.     In  this 


210  Tin:   DiiMi  Li.Tii:s  of 

way,  too,  the  hearts  of  the  unwary  are  deceived 
by  a  show  of  great  liberality ;  and  an  excellent 
opportunity  furnished,  to  declaim  against  narrow- 
minded  Presbyterians  who  believe  in  the  ever- 
lasting perdition  of  helpless  infants.  We  admit 
that  the  preachers  suppose  their  practice  to  be 
consistent  with  the  order  of  Christ's  house;  but 
this  Avill  not  change  the  essential  nature  of  truth, 
nor  make  that  right  which  is  wrong,  even  though 
like  Saul  of  Tarsus,  when  persecuting  the  church, 
they  think  they  are  doing  God  service.  Circum- 
cision (the  Old  Testament  baptism)  was  never 
applied  to  any  but  the  children  of  Abraham,  and 
to  parents  and  cluldren  who  became  proselytes 
to  Judaism.  Yet  that  was  "  tlie  seal  of  the  righ- 
teousness of  faith,"  as  much  as  baptism.  Of 
whose  faith?  Not  surely  of  the  "faith"  of  t'le 
infant  of  eiglit  days  old,  but  of  die  parent  who  in 
the  exercise  of  "faith,"  gave  away  the  child  to 
the  expected  Savior,  and  came  under  the  obliga- 
tions implied  in  tuch  a  gift,  to  bring  it  up  in  '•  the 
nurture  and  admonition  of  t)ie  Lord."  "  Cir- 
cumcision," says  Wesley,  "being  abolished,  and 
baptism  coming  in  the  room  of  it,  baptism  should 
be  applied  to  all  those  who  have  any  interest  in 
the  covenant — this  seems  to  manifest  the  right 
of  the  children  of  Chrisiiaas  to  these  blessings, 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  217 

or  that  they  have  an  interest  in  this  covenant."  * 
Doct.  Tracts,  p.  267.  Hence  also  we  find  that 
"when  the  apostles  received  into  church  fellowship 
the  parents,  it  is  generally  added  they  baptized 
their  household — but  we  never  read  of  their  bap- 
tizing the  household  or  the  children  of  any  who 
did  not  profess  faith  in  Christ.  The  reason  was 
precisely  the  same  for  refusing  baptism  to  the  off- 
spring of  unbelievers,  as  for  denying  circumcision 
to  those  who  were  not  Jews — "  The  seal  of  the 
righteousness  of  faith,"  (applied  in  either  form,) 
implied  the  existence  of  faith — the  seal  of  the 
covenant, — that  the  covenant  had  been  entered 
into.  "Where,  therefore,  there  is  no  "faith"  in 
exercise,  and  no  covenant  embraced  and  agreed 
to,  to  apply  the  seal  of  the  covenant,  is  to  seal  a 
blank.  It  is  plain,  therefore,  from  the  nature  of 
the  ordinance,  from  the  nature  of  the  covenant, 
(of  which  it  is  a  seal,)  as  well  as  from  the  char- 
acter and  extent  of  its  obligations,  that  in  the  bap* 

*  Watson  takes  the  same  view.  "The  question  is, 
whother  the  infant  children  of  believing  parents  are  enti- 
tled to  he  made  parties  to  the  covenant  of  grace  by  the 
act  of  their  parents?''^  "The  apostolic  practice  was  to 
baptize  the  Jiouses  (households)  of  them  that  believed,^'' 
"On  the  supposition  that  baptism  was  administered  to  the 
children  of  the  parents  who  thus  believed,  at  the  same 
time  as  themselves  and  IN  CONSEQUENCE  OF 
THEIR  BELIEVING,  it  may  be  asked,"  «fcc.  (Vol.  2, 
pp.  630,  639.) 


218  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

tism  of  the  infants  of  the  vicious  and  profane, 
"  who  are  strangers  to  the  covenants  of  promise," 
the  great  seal  of  High  Heaven,  the  solemn  ratifi- 
cation of  God's  covenant,  is  appended  to  a  nulli- 
ty, or  what  is  worse,  to  an  untruth.  Something 
indeed  is  said  about  an  *' unconditional  charter," 
entitling  all  infants  to  the  blessings  of  tlie  cove- 
nant, without  respect  to  their  parentage,  and  se- 
curing to  them  unconditionaUy^  the  right  of  bap- 
tism. But  why  were  the  blessings  of  this  "  mz- 
conditional  charter"  limited,  in  the  case  of  the 
Jews?  Why  did  it  not  secure  the  right  of  cir- 
cumcision to  the  infants  of  Gentiles  ?  And  why 
was  it  restricted  to  those  who  were  united  to  the 
prcfessing  people  of  God,  either  by  birth  or  pro- 
selytism  ?  Dr.  Clarke  on  Acts  lo:32,  tells  us, 
*'  the  Jewish  practice  was  invariably  to  receive 
the  heathen  children  Avith  (not  without)  their 
proselyted  parents."  x\.nd  Wesley  informs  us 
that  "  in  the  Christian  church,  from  its  earliest 
ages,  and  we  think  from  the  apostles'  time,  it  has 
been  the  custom  to  baptize  the  infant  children  of 
professed  Ckrislians.^^  Doct.  Tracts,  p.  275. 
The  father  of  Methodism,  tlien,  no  less  than  the 
word  of  God  and  tlie  example  of  the  apostles, 
condemns  the  practice  of  administering  baptism 
to  the  infiint  children  of  those  who  give  no  scrip- 
tural evidence  of  piety,     Man  cannot  search  the 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  219 

heart,  but  reason  may  learn  and  apply  the  princi- 
ples of  holy  writ,  by  which  we  are  "  to  try  the 
spirits"  and  test  the  character  and  fitness  of  those 
who  claim  for  themselves  or  their  offspring,  the 
**  sign  and  seal  "  of  the  covenant  of  grace.  To 
neglect  this,  is  to  declare  it  to  be  a  matter  of  no 
importance  that  institutions  of  divine  authority 
should  be  celebrated  in  "truth  and  ri^hteou-nass." 
*'  The  ordinance  is  inseparably  connected  with 
the  incumbent  duty  of 'bringing  up  the  children 
in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord.'  If 
this  connexion  is  lost  sight  of — if  it  is  not  con- 
templated at  the  time,  and  is  practically  disre- 
garded afterwards,  the  ordinance  becomes  no- 
thing better  than  a  useless  ceremony  and  an  idle 
and  profane  mockery  of  its  Divine  author."  * 

*  This  extract  is  from  the  pen  of  the  disting-uished 
Dr.  Wardlaw,  of  Glasgow.  The  Dr  adds — "The  profit 
to  the  child  must  be  through  the  medium  of  the  parent; 
and  it  has  long-  appeared  to  me,  that  it  is  to  the  parent, 
rather  than  to  the  child,  that  infant  baptism  is  in  the  first 
instance  to  be  reckoned  a  privilege."  "That  multitudes 
wiiohave  their  children  baptized,  never  think  of  the  ordi- 
nance in  any  such  light,  and  arc  quite  regardless  of  the 
obligations  which,  I  will  not  say  it  imposes,  but  which  it 
implies  and  brings  to  mind,  is  a  melancholy  truth.  And  I 
would  earnestly  admonish  those  parents,  of  the  guilt  they 
are  contracting  by  their  solemn  mockery  of  Heaven,  in  the 
careless  profanation  of  a  divine  institution."  (Woods  on 
Baptism,  p.  211.)  President  Edwards,  nearly  a  century 
ago,  abundantly  insisted  that  "this  way  of  proceeding 
tends  to  establish  the  stupidity  and  irreliffion  of  children, 
as  well  as  the  negligence  of  parents."  (Wks.  vol.  4,  p.  427.) 


220  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

2.  Nor  is  the  practice  with  regard  to  the  other 
sacrament  of  Christ's  house  at  all  more  agreea- 
ble to  reason  and  Scripture.  The  Book  of  Disci- 
pline prescribes  examination  for  admission  to  the 
Lord's  Supper,  but  as  it  says  nothing  about  the 
topics,  every  preacher  is  left  to  do  just  what 
seemeth  right  in  his  own  eyes.  Hence  the  very 
superficial  investigation  of  faith  and  practice  at 
camp-meetings,  &c.  Hence  the  common  usage 
of  receiving  an  appearance  of  tenderness,  as  suf- 
ficient recommendation,  without  inquiry  whether 
the  person  has  been  baptized,  or  whether  his  cha- 
racter and  habits  are  not  scandalous,  and  will  not 
render  him  a  disgrace  to  the  ordinance,  and  a  just 
object  of  contempt  to  the  infidel  and  scoffer.  A 
member  of  my  church,  (from  whose  lips  I  had 
the  fact,)  whilst  travelling  through  one  of  the 
western  counties  of  Pennsylvania,  was  present  at 
a  quarterly  meeting  when  the  communion  was 
celebrating.  When  the  services  were  nearly 
completed,  a  rough,  uncouth  person  pressed  for- 
ward toward  the  altar,  and  demanded  the  ele- 
ments, saying,  "  I  came  here  to  get  religion,  and 
like  to  forgot  it."  After  some  consultation  among 
the  preachers,  the  bread  and  wine  were  presented 
to  him.  This,  we  readily  admit,  is  an  extreme 
though  by  no  means  a  solitary  case.  But  where 
in  the  authorized  Book  of  Discipline  and  stan- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  221 

dard  of  doctrine,  will  you  find  one  syllable  which 
condemns  such  scandalous  proceedings.  The 
volume  therefore  which  contains  the  confession 
of  faith  and  forms  of  worship  adopted  by  Metho- 
dists, tacitly  gives  its  consent  and  approbation  to 
this  gross  outrage  upon  decency.  It  will  be  rea- 
dily admitted  that  in  the  purest  churches  and 
under  the  most  cautious  discipline,  unworthy 
persons  may  intrude  into  the  holy  mysteries  ;  but 
this  furnishes  no  apology  for  unforbidden  practi- 
ces, which  reflect  dishonor  upon  the  very  name 
of  religion. 

In  reply  to  these  statements  and  objections  it 
has  been  said,  "  that  an  individual  who  had  pre- 
viously been  very  wicked  might,  on  the  occasion 
of  a  camp-meeting,  become  truly  penitent  and  in- 
tend to  lead  a  new  life  ;  and  it  is  better  to  be  im- 
posed upon  than  to  stand  in  the  way  of  one  sin- 
cere soul  in  fulfiUing  the  command  of  Christ." 
In  other  words,  the  apostle  says,  *'  Let  a  man  ex- 
amine  himself  and  so  let  him  eat " — The  preach- 
er replies,  "  Let  him  become  truly  penitent,  and 
intend  to  lead  a  new  life  ;  and  leave  the  exami- 
nation to  a  more  convenient  seasonV  The 
aposde  says,  "  He  that  eateth  and  drinketh  un- 
worthily, eateth  and  drinketh  damnation  to  him- 
self, and  is  guilty  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the 
Lord,  not  discerning  the  Lord's  body  " — "  It  is 
19 


t2t  THB    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

better  for  us  to  be  imposed  upon,"  replies  the 
preacher,  "  and  that  sinners  should  risk  these  aw- 
ful consequences,  than  that  we  should  stand  in 
the  way  of  one  sincere  soul  in  fulfilling  the  com- 
mand of  Christ."  It  cannot  be  proved  that  Christ 
ever  commanded  any  man  to  rush  from  the  bois- 
terous excitement  of  the  camp-ground,  without 
time  for  self-recollection  and  self-examination,  to 
the  tender  and  most  solemn  exercises  of  the  com- 
munion. There  is  no  example  of  any  such  prac- 
tice in  the  Scriptures  ;  and  the  language  of  Paul 
plainly  implies  the  direct  contrary.  Wesley, 
however,  asserts  that  our  Lord  commanded  the 
very  men  who  were  unconverted,  (his  disciples,) 
who  (in  the  full  sense  of  the  word)  were  not  be- 
lievers, "  to  do  this  in  remembrance  of  him^\' 
He  adduces  this  to  show  "the  falsehood  of  the 
assertion  that  none  but  the  converted,  those  who 
are  believers  in  the  full  sense,  ought  to  commu- 
nicate." 

3.  A  third  head  of  abuses  is  the  practice  of 
kneeling  in  the  act  of  communion,  and  much  of 
the  language  employed  in  administering  the  or- 
dinance.. The  Savior  and  his  disciples  celebra- 
ted the  first  supper  (**  the  Lord's  Supper,''  as 
Paul  calls  it,  1st  Cor.  11:20)  in  the  common  ta- 
ble posture.  "  Now  when  the  even  was  come," 
says  the  evangelist  Matthew,  "  he  sa-f  down  with 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  223 

the  twelve."  "  And  as  they  were  eating,  Jesus 
took  bread  and  blessed  it,  and  brake  it,  and  gave 
to  the  disciples,  and  said — Take  eat,  this  is  my 
body."  So  also  Luke  (22:14)  "  He  sat  down,'' 
&c.  And  to  render  the  custom  of  the  primitive 
church  still  more  evident,  Paul  characterises  the 
ordinance  as  "  Me /.or<Y's  fable.'"  1  Cor.  10:21. 
It  is  admitted  that  they  sat  in  a  leaning  attitude, 
as  was  then  usual,  but  this  does  not  in  the  least 
abate  the  force  of  the  testimony.  Now  if  the 
Blessed  Redeemer  has  set  us  the  example  in 
adopting  this  posture,  even  in  instituting  the 
sacrament,  by  what  authority  do  men  venture  to 
change  what  he  has  ordained  ?  If  Christ  and 
his  disciples  sat  down,  who  shall  authorize  a  dif- 
ferent attitude  ? 

Further  :  The  practice  oi  kneeling  in  receiving- 
the  sacramental  elements,  originated  in  supersti- 
tion. Pope  Ilonorius  the  Second  is  believed  to 
have  been  the  first  that  ordained  this  posture;  and 
it  grew  out  of  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation 
and  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  which  had  some  time 
previously  received  the  infallible  sanction  of  Pope 
Innocent  the  third.  "  The  most  ardent  friends 
of  kneeling,"  says  Dr.  Miller,  *' do  not  pretend 
to  find  any  example  of  this  posture  in  the  whole 
history  of  the  church,  prior  to  the  thirteenth  cen- 
tury.     And   accordingly  in   the  Greek  church, 


224  THE    DIFF'CULTIES    OF 

which  separated  from  the  Latin  before  the  doc- 
trine of  Transubstantiation  arose,  kneeling  at  the 
communion  is  iinivnown."     It  must  be  regarded 
therefore,  as  a  part  of  that'*  will  worship  and  vol- 
untary humility,'*  which  characterise  the  corrup- 
tions of  the  Romish  church.     Besides,  the  ordi- 
nance is  a  feast — a  feast  of  confidence,  fellowship, 
joy  and  thanksgiving  ;  and  there  is  something  ut- 
terly incongruous  in  such  a  posture  in  such  cir- 
cumstances.    '»  In  what  nation  is  it  thought  suit- 
able to  kneel  at  banquets  ?     Where  do  men  eat 
and  drink  upon  their  knees  ?"     It  is  admitted  that 
it  is  not  done  superstitiously  among  Protestants  ; 
but  it  is  undoubtedly  adapted  to  nourish  error  and 
superstition,  and  is  liable  to  great  and  continual 
misapprehension  by  the  weak  and  ignorant.  And 
if  the  door  be  thrown  open — if  the  precedent  be  ' 
set  of  improving;  upon    divine  institutions,   the 
way  is  clear  to  admit  all  the  worst  abominations 
of  the  church  of  Rome. 

We  are  constrained  also  to  object  to  **  the 
prayer  of  consecration"  which  the  elder  is  required 
*' /(?  5(7?/"  before  he  distributes  the  bread  and 
wine.  Our  "  Lord  Jesus  took  bread  and  blessed 
it,"  or  ^^  gave  thanks i'*''  as  it  is  recorded  by  Paul, 
and  as  many  of  the  Greek  copies  of  Matthew's 
Gospel  have  it.  Why  will  men  venture  to  change 
the  language  of  Him  who  instituted  this   ordi- 


ARMIMAX    METHODISM.  225 

nance  ?  And  our  objections  are  still  stronger 
when  we  find  the  undue  importance  which  is  at- 
tached to  this  "prayer  of  consecration."  We  aie 
particularly  informed  that  "  if  the  consecrated 
bread  and  winehe  all  spent,  the  Elder  may  C07Z- 
secrate  more  by  repeating  the  prayer  of  cGnse- 
cniiion  "  /  And  again, that  "if  the  Elder  be  strai- 
tened for  time,  he  may  omit  any  part  of  the  ser- 
vice, EXCEPT  THE  PRAYER  OF  CONSE- 
CRATION." But  where  is  all  this  found  in  the 
New  Testament  ?  Where  has  the  Saviour  in- 
timated that  if  the  Elder  have  not  laid  his  hands 
upon  a  sufficient  quantity  of  bread  and  wine, 
when  he  first  "  gives  thanks,"  (or  offers  "  the 
prayer  of  consecration,^')  he  must  '^lay  his  hands'* 
upon  more,  and  "  give  thanks"  over  again !  * 
"  Who  hath  required  this  at  your  hands  ?  Does 
it  not  savour  strongly  of  the  Mass  to  give  such 
prominence  to  a  form  prescribed  by  man  ?  *'EX- 
CEPT  the  prayer  of  consecration'"!  The  Holy 
Mother  Church  has  it,  "  EXCEPT  all  be  said 
and  done  by  a  regularly  ordained  priest  in  com- 
munion with  the  See  of   Rome,  empowered  to 


^It  is  remarkable  that  although  our  Savior  is  said  to 
nave  "given  thanks,"  just  before  he  distributed  the  elc- 
aients,  "the  prayer  of  consecration"  contains  not  one  syl- 
juhle  properly  of  the  nature  of  thanksgiving! 

19* 


M6  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

consecrate  the   bread   or  wafer   imo  "  the  body, 
blood,  soul  and  divinity"  of  Christ! 

Finally  :  The  unscriplural  character  of  this  part 
of  the  Methodist  Discipline  is  also  manifest  in  the 
act  of  distribution.  Paul  tells  us  that  he  "received 
of  the  Lord"  that  the  Lord  Jesus  said,  "  Take 
eat — this  is  my  body,"  &c.  "  This  cup  is  the 
New  Testament  in  my  blood,"  &;c.  (I  Cor.  1  J: 
24,  25.)  And  v/ith  a  few  unimportant  variations, 
the  same  is  the  record  by  Matthew  and  Luke.  But 
here  in  the  "  Discipline,"  the  form  used  by  the 
Savior  of  men,  and  specially  revealed  to  the  apos- 
tle Paul,  is  crowded  into  the  '-^prayer  of  conse- 
cration,'^ and  instead  thereof,  the  Elder  is  to  say 
the  following:  "The  body  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  which  was  given  for  thee,  preserve  thy 
soul  and  body  unto  everlasting  life.  Take  and 
eat  this  in  remembrance  that  Christ  died  for  thee, 
and  feed  on  him  by  faith  with  thanksgiving." 
And  a  similar  form  is  used  when  he  distributes 
the  wine,  only  with  the  necessary  adaptation  to 
the  change  of  the  elements.  But  it  is  obvious 
that  this,  to  say  the  least,  is  a  needless  and  unau- 
thorized departure  from  Christ's  own  teaching 
and  direct  example.  If  the  Savior  himself  selec- 
ted and  used  a  certain  form  of  words,  who  will 
venture  to  say  it  is  not  most  agreeable  to  his  will? 


ARMIXIAN"    METHODISM.  227 

Can  it  be  right  to  substitute  a  different  one  ?  And 
especially  is  this  inquiry  important,  when  the 
sitbstiluted  form  employs  a  phraseology  with 
regard  to  the  "body  and  blood"  of  the  Savior 
ill  the  act  of  prayer,  which  has  no  parallel  in  the 
Scriptures,  but  is  strongly  tinctured  with  idolatry, 
"  The  body  of  our  Lord,  &l(:.^  preserve  thy  soul 
and  body  unto  eveilasting  life."  The  Romanist 
could  consistently  use  such  a  prayer,  because  he 
believes  that  the  bread  or  wafer  is  "  the  body, 
soul  and  divinity  "  of  the  Savior.  But  the  sober 
Christian  will  say — "  Let  me  employ  as  nearly  as 
possible,  the  gracious  words  which  proceeded 
from  the  lips  of  Him  who  spake  as  never  man 
spake,  and  who  has  a  right  to  say  what  shall 
be  the  form  ofadministeiing  the  most  solemn  ordi- 
nance of  his  own  house." 

POSTSCRIPT  TO  LETTER  VL 

Some  may  perhaps  think  that  too  much  impor- 
tance is  attached  to  the  form  of  words  used  by 
the  Savior  and  his  apostles.  But  would  they 
not  revolt,  if  any  uninspired  man  should  take  the 
liberty  cf  changing  the  baptismal  form  ?  Yet 
why  should  the  one  phraseology  be  esteemed 
more  sacred  than  the  other  ?  Why  would  it  not 
be  lawful  to  say — "  I  baptize  thee  in  the  name  of 
thfi  Trinity  "  ?     Yet  this  change  would  not  be  so 


t^S  TTIK    PirFICITLTIKS    OF 

great  as  has  been  usual  in  the  form  of  the  other 
sacrament.  The  form  of  baptism  is  but  once  re- 
corded, (Matth.  28:19,)  yet  we  believe  there  is 
almost  entire  uniformity  with  respect  to  it,  in  the 
Christian  world.  Whence  the  unwarranted  lib- 
erty taken  with  the  other  form  ! 

The  writer  is  also  aware  that  in  this  letter,  and 
perhaps  in  some  otliers,  he  crosses  the  path  of 
one  or  two  denominations  of  Christians  with 
whom  he  wishes  to  have  no  controversy,  and  to- 
ward whom  he  entertains  only  feelings  of  frater- 
nal regard.  Having  been  violently  assailed,  and 
challenged,  and  thus  forced  into  collision  with 
Methodism,  he  felt  it  to  be  his  duty  as  far  as  in 
him  lay,  to  make  a  pretty  full  exposition  of  what 
he  believes  to  be  the  unscriptural  tenets  and  prac- 
tices of  that  system.  If  in  so  doing,  he  has  oc- 
casionally touched  a  point  in  which  it  harmoni- 
ses with  the  views  and  usages  of  other  sects, 
while  he  asks  for  a  candid  perusal  of  what  he 
may  write,  he  can  only  express  his  regret  at  the 
necessity  which  has  been  laid  upon  him,  of  en- 
croaching to  some  small  extent  upon  neutral  ter- 
ritory. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  229 


LETTER    ¥!I. 

Methodist  Episcopacy.     Exc.hisiGn  of  Laymen^ 
Right  of  Property. 

Rev.  Sir: 

In  the  progress  of  this  discussion,  we  are 
broiig-ht  to  the  subject  of  Church  Government,  as 
administered  among  Methodists. 

IX.  The  DtFFicuLTiES  of  Methodism  in  regard  to 
HER  Form  of  Government — it  is  unscriptural,  an- 
ti-republican,  UNJUST  AND  tyrannical. 

On  page  144  of  the  Book  of-  Discipline  is  a 
prayer  to  "  Ahuighty  God,"  in  which  the  ap- 
pointment of"  divers  orders  "  of  ministers  in  his 
church,  is  distincdy  ascribed  to  Him.  On  pages 
25,  31,  32,  of  the  same  vokime,  three  forms  of 
consecration  and  ordination  are  laid  down,  for 
Bishops,  Elders,  and  Deacons,  respectively.  In 
the  appendix  to  Buck's  Theological  Dictionary^ 
written  by  Dr.  Bangs,  it  is  said  that  in  Methodism 
"  three  orders  of  ministers  are  recognized,  and 
the  duties  peculiar  to  each  are  clearly  defined.'*" 
Dr.  Clarke,  in  commenting  on  1  Tim.  chap.  3, 


230  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

V.  1,  States  that  "Episcopacy  in  the  church  of 
God  is  of  divine  appointment,  and  should  be 
maintained  and  respected.  Under  God  there 
should  be  supreme  governors  in  the  church  as 
well  as  in  the  state.  'J'he  state  has  its  monarch: 
the  church  has  its  bishop.^'  "  The  office  of  a 
bishop  is  from  God."   Note,  Acts  20:28. 

Now  that  these  "  divers  orders  "  are  the  inven- 
tion of  men,  and  not  the  appointment  of  God, 
has  been  often  and  most  abundantly  proved. 
For, 

1.  There  is  no  Scriptural  evidence  whatever 
ihat  the  office  of  Deacon  embraced  the  duty  ei- 
ther of  teaching  or  ruling  in  the  church.  In 
support  of  this  position,  we  refer  to  the  original 
appointment  as  recorded  in  the  6th  chapter  of 
Acts,  where  the  object  is  distinctly  declared  to 
be,  not  the  establishment  of  another  order  of  min- 
isters or  teachers,  but  of  a  class  of  men  whose 
business  it  should  be  to  "  serve  tables,''^  or  attend 
to  the  secular  aflfairs  of  the  church  ;  "  but  we," 
say  the  apostles,  "  will  give  ourselves  to  prayer 
and  to  the  ministry  of  the  ivord.''^  That  some 
of  those  who  were  first  appointed  deacons,  did  af- 
terwards preach  the  Gospel,  and  act  as  evange- 
lists, is  not  denied ;  but  there  is  no  evidence 
whatever  that  they  were  either  ministers  or  evan- 
gelists, in  consequence  of  their  appointment  to 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  231 

**  serve  tables.'^  "  It  is  not  reason,"  say  thd 
apostles,  "  that  we  should  LEAVE  the  word  of 
God  and  serve  tables.^^ 

Dr.  Bangs,  in  his  "  Vindication  of  Methodist 
Episcopacy,"  p.  14,  derives  an  argument  from 
1  Tim.  3:8,  in  support  of  the  ministerial  charac- 
ter of  deacons  :  "  Likewise  must  the  deacons  be 
grave^^ — But  just  three  verses  farther  on,  the 
apostle  adds,  "even  so  must  their  ivives  be  grave." 
Were  the  deacons'  wives  ministers  of  the  Gospel? 
And  when  Paul  subjoins  two  verses  farther  down, 
>'  For  they  that  use  the  office  of  deacon  well,  pur- 
chase to  themselves  a  good  degree,  and  great 
boldness  in  the  faith  " — Dr.  Clarke  well  expres- 
ses the  meaning — "  they  are  here  said  to  pur- 
chase to  themselves  a  good  degree  ;  for  instead 
of  having  to  minister  to  the  bodies  and  bodily 
wants  of  the  poor,  the  faithful  deacons  were 
raised  to  minister  in  holy  things :  and  instead  of 
ministering  the  bread  that  perisheth,  they  were 
raised  to  minister  the  bread  of  life  to  immortal 
souls."  This  no  doubt  was  often  exemplified 
when  persons  exercising  the  office  of  deacon  dil- 
igently and  faithfully,  were  elevated  to  the  higher 
office  of  ministers  of  the  everlasting  Gospel. 
"  It  is  evident,"  says  Dr.  Scott,  an  Episcopalian, 
*'  that  they  were  appointed  to  take  care  of  the 
property  of  the  church,  and  not  to  the  pastoral 


232  THE    DIFFICULTIES    Of 

office.''^  "  It  seems  unclenial)le  that  they  were  ap- 
pointed solely  to  take  care  of  the  temporal  con- 
cerns of  the  church ;  and  not,  as  deacons^  to 
preach,  or  to  administer  sacred  ordinances."  ♦'  It 
appears  to  me  very  likely,"  continues  Dr.  Scott, 
"  that  both  at  this  and  future  periods,  many  who 
were  appointed  deacons  in  the  Jirst  instance,  af- 
terwards became  evangelists  or  pastors  ;  and  when 
they  were  fully  employed,  other  deacons  were 
appointed."  Com.  on  Acts  6:2 — 6.  Since  then 
not  a  particle  of  evidence  can  be  gathered  from 
the  New  Testament,  that  the  first  deacons  were 
ministers  of  the  Gospel  at  all,  we  need  not  trou- 
ble ourselves  to  disprove  the  other  feature  of  the 
system,  which  places  them  in  an  "order"  infe- 
rior to  elders  and  bishops.*  It  is  a  subject  of 
much  curiosity  with  some  persons,  to  have  a  dis- 
tinct reference  made  to  the  identical  passage  or 
passages  of  Scripture,  upon  which  the  preachers 
of  Methodism  rely  to  establish  this  difference  of 

*  The  "Discipline,"  (p.  32,)  authorizes  the  deacon  ''to 
baptize";  but  it  appears  that  one  ordination  hy  "  the  lay- 
ing' on  of  the  hands  of  a  bishop,"  is  not  sufficient  to  qual. 
ify  for  administering-  the  other  sacrament.  But  where 
has  the  Master  said  that  some  of  his  servants  are  author- 
ized  to  officiate  in  the  one  ordinance,  and  not  qualified 
for  the  other?  A  distinction  of  this  kind,  in  the  lawful 
administration  of  the  sacraments,  is  very  well  in  Popery, 
with  her  ''blasphemous  fable"  of  "the  body,  soul  and  di- 
vinity " ;  but  is  unworthy  of  any  church  emancipated 
from  her  thraldom. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.,.  29^ 

"order"  among  the  ministers  of  Christ.  Show 
us  the  chapter  and  verse,  and  then  we  will  believe 
that  regularly  ordained  ministers  of  the  Gospel, 
who  are  called  deacons,  having  received  the  lay- 
ing on  of  hands  but  once,  are  quite  inferior  to 
another  set  of  regularly  ordained  ministers  who 
are  called  elders,  having  received  the  laying  on 
of  hands  more  than  once.  If  the  distinction  of 
"  order "  consists  in  this,  that  two  ordinations 
are  better  than  one,  then  three,  four  and  five,  by 
the  same  reasoning,  would  be  better  still ;  and 
thus  may  the  humble  deacon  of  Methodism  grad- 
ually ascend  in  the  numerical  scale,  until  he  shall 
seat  himself  in  the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  and  nobody 
knows  how  far  above  Pontifex  Maximus  him- 
self.* 

2.  With  regard  to  the  '•  orders  '*  of  bishop  and 
elder,  these  names  are  uniformly  used  in  the 
New  Testament  as  convertible  terms,  the  one  or 

*  A  few  illustrations  of  the  practice  in  the  primitive 
church  may  not  be  out  of  place.  Origen  tells  us — "The 
deacons  were  appointed  to  preside  over  the  tables  of  the 
church,  as  we  are  taught  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.'* 
Ambrose  in  the  fourth  century  says — *'  The  deacons  or- 
dinarily were  not  authorized  to  preach."  Jerome  calls 
the  deacon,  "  a  minister  of  tables  and  widows."  And  the 
sixth  general  Council  of  Constantinople  decided  that  "the 
Scriptural  deacons  were  no  other  than  overseers  of  the 
poor,  and  that  such  was  the  opinion  of  the  ancient  fath- . 
res."— (Dr.  Miller.) 
20 


8S9  run    DlFFICULTIEt    OF 

the  other  being  employed  just  as  convenient  to 
the  writer.     And  what  is  mi.ch  more  conclusive, 
the  very  same  character  and  powers  are  ascribed 
to  elders  as  to  bishops,  thus  proving  that  they  are 
the  same,  not  difTerent  orders  of  ministers.     In 
proof  of  these  positions  we  cite  Acts  20:17 — 28. 
**  And  from  Miletus  he  sent  to  Ephesus,  and  call- 
ed the  elders  of  the  church."     *'  Take  heed  to 
yourselves  and  to  all  the  flock  over  which  the 
Holy  Ghost  hath  made  you  overseers,"  (or  bisb- 
ops.)     The  very  same  persons  are  denominated 
by  the  inspired  apostle,  bishops  and  elders,  and 
that  within  a  few  sentences.     Philip.  1:1.  '*The 
bishops  and  deacons  "  of  Philippi  are  addressed. 
Titus  1:5,  7.  "  For  this  caiise  I  left  thee  in  Crete 
that  thou  shouldest  set  in  order  the  things  that 
are  wanting,  and  ordain  elders  in  every  city — for 
a  BISHOP  must  be  blameless,"  &;c.;  where,  be- 
sides the  manifest  fact  that  Paul's  elders  were 
the  same  with  Paul's  bishops,  we  have  here,  as 
in  the  previous  cases,  proof  beyond  controversy, 
that  in  apostolic  times,  several  bishops  such  as 
the  New  Testament  sanctions,  were  accustomed 
to  reside  in  a  single  city.     Titus  is  directed  to 
ordain  a  number  of  them  in  every  city.     But 
could  these  have  been  such  bishops  as  Method- 
ism '*  consecrates ^^^  of  whose  employment  a  great 
part  leems  to  be  ♦♦  to  travel  at  large  among  the 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  534 

people,"  and  who  cannot  in  any  instance  ceasa 
*'  to  travel  through  the  connexion  at  large"  with- 
out permission  of  the  general  conference,  under 
the    penalty  of  being  deprived  of  their  office  ? 
(Discip.    p.  28.)      1    Pet.    1:1,2.    "  The  elders 
which  are  among  you  1  exhort — feed  the  flock  of 
God — taking  the  oversight  thereof,''''  or  as  the 
word  in  the  original  signifies,  "  exercising  the 
office  and  performing  the  duties   of  a  bishop." 
Whether  Paul  and  Peter  thought  it  needful,  when 
about  to  confer  the  office  of  a  Scriptural  bishop, 
first  to  ordain  the  man  a  deacon;   secondly  to  or- 
dain him  an  elder  ;  and  thirdly  and  lastly^  to 
**  consecrate  "  him  a  bishop,  we  leave  the  candid 
reader   to  judge.     We  rather  opine  they  were 
belter  instructed  by  Him,  who,  when  the  disci- 
ples strove  which  should  be  the  greatest^  set  a 
little  child  in  the  midst,  and  bade  them  take  him 
for  a  pattern  of  true  greatness  ;  and  who  hath 
left  on  record  the  memorable    sentence,    *'  The 
princes   of  the  Gentiles  exercise  dominion  over 
them,  but  it  shall  not  be  so  among  youJ*^     And 
as  regards  the  judgment  of  Wesley,  he  expressly 
asserts — "  Lord  King's  account  of  the  primitivt 
church  convinced  me  many  years  ago,  that  bish- 
ops and  elders  are  the  same  order.'^ 

The  evidence  against  Episcopacy  is  so  conclu- 
sive that  Watson  affirms—"  The  argument  drawn 


!835'  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

by  tlie  Presbyterians  from  the  promiscuous  use 
of  these  terms  (bishop  and  elder)  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament is  incontrovertible."  (Vol.  2,  p.  575.) 
And  even  Dr.  Bangs,  who,  in  the  appendix  to 
Buck's  Theological  Dictionary,  has  spoken  so 
largely  of  the  "  three  orders  "  and  "  the  duties 
peculiar  to  each,"  elsewhere  admits  that  "  if  any 
choose  to  say  that  we  acknowledge  two  orders 
only,  and  a  superior  minister  possessing  a  dele- 
gated jurisdiction,  &c.,  he  has  my  full  consent.^* 
Here  then  we  have  a  plain  acknowledgement 
that  the  office  of  the  Methodist  bishop  is  of  1m- 
man  origin — that  it  is  superior  to  that  of  elder 
Folely  by  the  consent  and  delegation  of  man.  Of 
course  all  that  is  left  to  Methodist  Episcopacy  is 
a  mere  human  invention.  And  the  "  divei^  or- 
ders "  of  the  ministry  appointed  by  "Almighty 
God  "  are  reduced  to  two,  deacons  and  elders  ! 
AVhether  the  number  might  not  be  still  further  re- 
duced, must  be  decided  by  those  who  have  exam- 
ined the  evidence  of  the  ministerial  character  of 
the  New  Testament  deacons. 

It  is  an  inquiry  also  of  much  interest — when 
did  Methodist  Episcopacy  arise  ?  The  Scriptures 
know  nothing  about  it — from  what  causes  did  it 
originate  ?  The  opinion  of  Wesley  upon  the 
subject  of  its  introduction  may  be  learned  from  a 
^^tter   to    Mr.    Asbury,    dated   Sept.    20,   1758, 


ARMINIAN   METHODISM.  23C 

•♦  How  can  yon,"  says  the  great  apostle  of  the 
system,  "  how  dare  you  suffer  yourself  to  be 
called  a  bishop  ?  I  shudder,  I  start,  at  the  very 
thought.  Men  may  call  me  a  knave,  or  a  fool, 
a  rascal,  a  scoundrel,  and  I  am  content ;  but  they 
shall  never  with  my  consent  call  me  a  bishop. 
For  my  sake,  for  God's  sake,  for  Christ's  sake, 
put  a  full  end  to  this."  It  is  obvious  from  thia 
extract,  that  the  flattering  title  which  chimes  so 
sweetly  in  the  ear  of  ambitious  ecclesiastics,  was 
at  that  time  just  beginning  to  be  employed  in  the 
Methodist  church.  And  whether  it  is  probable, 
that  a  man  of  Wesley's  strong  sense  would  make 
all  this  ado  about  a  mere  name,  if  there  had  not 
been  connected  with  it  much  of  the  arrogant  as- 
sumption of  the  office,  we  submit  to  the  decision 
of  candor.  Both  Scripture  and  Wesley  refuse 
their  countenance  to  Methodist  episcopacy.  How 
then  did  it  originate  ?  We  reply,  from  the  love 
of  title  and  distinction  wliich  is  native  in  the  hu- 
man heart.  It  appears  that  Mr.  Wesley  first  ap- 
pointed Dr.  Coke,  who  was  directed  to  appoint 
Mr.  Asbury,  svperintcndent  of  the  Methodist 
churches  in  America;  but  this  humble  title  did 
not  long  satisfy  these  reverend  gentlemen.  In 
four  or  five  years,  they  began  to  employ  the  term 
bishop  in  the  minutes  of  conference ;  and  at  this 
time  it  was  that  Wesley  wrote  the  letter  we  havt 
20* 


287  THE    DIFFICULTIPS   OF 

quoted  above,  expressing  his  indignation,  and  ab- 
horrence of  the  substitution.     It  seems,  moreo» 
ver,  that  at  least  one  of  these  gentlemen  had  some 
occasional  misgivings  respecting  the  validity  of 
his  episcopal  ordination.     In  1804,  Dr.  Coke  ap- 
plied to  Bishop  White  of  the  Protestant  Episco- 
pal Church,  to  have  himself  and  others  admitted 
to  the  episcopacy;  thus  acknowledging  his  claim 
to  the  office  to  be  utterly  destitute  of  foundation. 
He  tells  Bishop   White,  "  that  Mr.   Wesley  had 
invested  him  with  episcopal  authority,  so  far  as 
he  had  a  right  to  do  so  ; ''  but  as   Wesley  never 
held  higher  than  the  priest's  office  m  the  Church 
of  England;  it  is  plain  that  Coke  had  as  good  a 
ifight  to  ordain  to  the  episcopal  office  as  Wesley  ! 
In  view  of  these  facts,  it  is  adapted  to  provoke 
ft  smile,  to  peruse  the  statement  of  the  origin  of 
the  Methodist  Church,  prefixed  to  the  Book  of 
Discipline.     "  Mr.  Wesley,"  they  tell  us,  *^ pre- 
ferring the  episcopal  mode  of  church  government 
to  any  other,  in  1784  solemnly  set  apart  Thomas 
Coke  for  the  episcopal  office" — a  priest  ordain- 
ing a  bishop — That  Mr.  Wedey  ''delivered  to 
Dr.  Coke  letters  of  episcopal  orders,  and  directed 
him  to  set  apart  Francis  Asbnry  to  the  office  of  a 
bishop    after  arriving  in  America" — Tn    conse- 
quence of  which,  Mr.  Asbury  appears  to  have 
b^en  hurried  through  the  probationarv  degrees  of 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  238 

deacon  and  elder — or  in  the  language  of  Dr. 
Bangs,  (Appendix  to  Buck,)  "  was  ordained  by 
Dr.  Coke,^rs^  to  the  ofRce  of  deacon,  then  elder, 
and  then  superintendent  or  bishop;  "  and  all,  it 
seems,  at  the  same  meeting  of  conference  !  And 
last,  not  least,  we  are  told  that "  the  general  con- 
ference did  unanimously  receive  the  said  Thomas 
Coke  and  Francis  Asbury  as  their  bishops,  being 
fully  satinjied  of  the  validity  of  their  episcopal 
ordination !  ^^ 

We  cannot  help  congratulating  the  ministers  of 
Methodism  upon  the  firmness  of  the  foundation  of 
tlieif  ministerial  authority.  Faith  at  least  will 
have  abundant  room  for  exercise  and  improve- 
ment. They  must  believe  that  priest  Wesley 
consecrated  Bishop  Coke,  imparted  an  authority 
he  did  not  possess.  They  must  believe  that  by 
this  means  Thomas  Coke  becapie  invested  with 
all  the  rights,  titles,  and  appurtenances  of  a  bish- 
op— although  the  way  Methodist  bishops  are  no^ 
"constituted"  is  quite  different.*  They  must 
believe^  nevertheless,  that  both  inventions  for  ma- 
king a  bishop  are  right — that  Thomas  Coke  was 
well  and  truly  made  a  bishop  by  Mr.   Wesley, 

*  A  Methodist  bishop  is  now  made  "  by  the  election  of 
the  General  Conference,  and  the  laying  on  of  the  hands 
of  three  bishops^  or  at  least  of  owe  bishop  and  two  elders.^* 
Discip.  p.  25. 


230  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

only  four  years  before  he  wrote,  ♦'  call  me  knave, 
fool,  rascal,  scoundrel,  but  never  call  me  bishop:" 
and  they  must  believe  that  the  letter  (of  which 
this  is  an  extract)  was  directed  (in  VthS)  to  Mr. 
Asbury,  and  conveyed  a  most  pungent  reproof 
for  permitting  himself  to  be  clothed  with  an  of- 
fice, and  addressed  by  a  tide,  which  Mr.  Wesley 
himself,  only  four  years  previously  (17^4)  had 
expressly  ialended  for  him  ;  and  for  this  purpose 
priest  Wesley  had  consecrated  Bishop  Coke,  and 
Bishop  Coke  was  to  consecrate  Bishop  Asbury. 
(See  Doct.  and  Discip.  M.  E.  (.'hurch,  p.  6.) 

But  it  were  well  if  this  ridiculous  burlesque  of 
episcopacy  terminated  here.  'J'h.ere  is  a  much 
more  serious  aspect  of  tl  e  r.flair.  Bishc  ps,  ci- 
ders, and  deacons,  have  seated  themselves  in  the 
high  places  of  the  church  ;  and  it  be  (;omes  an  in- 
quiry of  much  importance — How  have  they  dis- 
posed of  the  laity?  We  reply — they  are  so  dis- 
posed of  as  to  be  charitably  relieved  of  the  whole 
burden  of  saying  or  doing  any  thing  in  the  secular 
or  spiritual  administration  of  the  church.  All 
they  have  to  do  is  to  contribute  liberally,  and  sub- 
mit implicitly  to  the  dictation  of  their  superiors. 
The  preachers  have  legislated  the  whole  power 
over  the  temporal  and  spiritual  concerns  of  the 
church  out  of  the  people's  hands,  &m\Jnfo  their 
own.     This  Wesley  candidly  avowed  as  his  ori- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  840 

ginal  intention.  In  a  letter  to  I.  Mason,  dated 
near  London,  January  13,  1790,  "As  long," 
says  he,  "as  I  live,  the  people  shall  have  no 
share  in  choosing  either  stewards  or  leaders  among 
the  Methodists.  We  have  not,  and  never  had 
any  such  custom.  TVe  are  no  republicans,  and 
never  intend  to  be.  It  would  be  better  for  those 
that  are  so  minded  to  go  quietly  away."  Accor- 
dingly, when  in  1797,  the  people  in  some  parts 
of  England  began  to  take  the  alarm,  and  petition- 
ed in  large  numbers  "  that  they  might  have  a 
voice  in  the  formation  of  their  own  laws,  the 
choice  of  their  own  officers,  and  the  distribution 
of  their  oivn  property,''  (see  Buck's  Theological 
Dictionary,  art.  Methodists,)  the  love  of  power 
conquered  the  sense  of  right,  and  these  petition- 
ers were  denied  those  privileges,  which  both  rea- 
son and  Scripture  teach  every  man,  are  the  fun- 
damental principles  of  all  freedom,  civil  as  well 
as  religious.  In  tliis  country,  too,  the  free  spirit 
of  our  civil  government  lias  extended  its  reforming 
hand  to  the  oppressions  of  religious  tyranny.  A 
large  and  respectable  body  of  Methodists  have  be- 
gun to  feel  and  act  like  Christian  freemen.  7'he 
rights  and  privileges  for  which  they  have  been 
contending,  are  the  same  for  which  their  brethren 
in  England  petitioned  in  1797.  And  how  have 
^heir  efforts  toward  emancipation  been  received  ? 


241  THE    DIFFICULTIES    Ot 

Just  as  might  have  been  expected  from  a  clerical 
aristocracy  which  hohls  all  the  power  in  its  own 
hands,  and  wields  the  sword  of  discipline  agreea- 
bly to  its  sovereign  pleasure.  The  advocates  of 
the  people's  rights  were  excommunicated — ex- 
communicated  for  insisting  upon  those  very  rights 
in  ecdesiasiical  matters,  for  which,  in  slate  poli- 
cy, our  fathers  fought  and  bled  in  the  great  revo- 
lutionary struggle — viz  :  "  A  voice  in  making 
their  own  laws,  electing  their  otvn  rulers,  and 
distributing  their  own  property  ^ 

To  these  statements  it  has  been  replied,  '*  that 
as  every  preacher  before  he  can  be  admitted  by 
the  conference,  must  be  recommended  by  the  la- 
ity, and  as  the  conference  cannot  move  a  single 
step  towards  his  admission,  without  such  recom- 
mendation, it  follows  that  the  laity  are  the  origin 
and  source  of  all  power  in  the  church."  But  Dr. 
Bangs,  in  the  Appendix  to  Buck,  informs  us  that 
*'  a  person  thinking  himself  moved  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  to  preach  the  Gospel,  first  makes  known 
his  views  and  exi^rcises  to  the  preacher  having 
charge  of  the  circuit,  who  if  he  consider  the  ap* 
plicant  a  fit  person,  (hereis  the  origin  of  all  pow- 
er,) grants  him  license  to  exhort,"  &c.  Besides, 
if  it  were  correct,  that  the  laity  must  recommend 
the  candidate  to  the  conference,  before  he  can  be 
received,  it  would  be  a  marvellous  proof  of  their 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM. 


242 


holding  all  the  power  in  their  hands,  becaufc, 
forsooth,  a  man  who  wishes  to  turn  preacher, 
must  get  a  few  of  his  friends  to  recommend  him! 
The  quarterly  conferences,  it  is  further  said,  are 
composed  partly  of  laymen;  and  these  bodies 
are  the  door  of  entrance  to  the  ministry.  Sic.  But 
these  laymen,  according  to  Dr.  Bangs,  "are  the 
stewards,  leaders,  and  exhoriers^^  of  the  circuit, 
appointed  directly  or  indirectly  .by  the  preachers, 
and  mere  tools  to  do  their  pleasure. 

Indeed,  we  may  fearlessly  affirm  that  there  is 
not  a  form  of  church  government  on  earth,  (the 
Papacy  excepted,)  so  radically  opposed  to  repub- 
licanism as  Methodism.     The  legislative,  execu- 
tive, and  judicial  powers  are  all  placed  in  the  hands 
of  a  privileged  aristocracy — the  preachers  ;  and  at 
their  sovereign  nod,  both  men  and  money  are  dis- 
posed of,  to  promote  whatever  purposes  piety, 
ambition,   proselytism,  or    whim,  may    dictate. 
*'  The  powers  of  the  travelling  preachers  have 
been  pronounced  aristocratic  by  some  of  the  most 
distinguished  adhering  and  seceding  ministers  of 
the  Methodist  church.     Dr.  Coke  termed  the  sys- 
tem an  "  arbitrary  aristocracy."  (Meth.  Prot.  p. 
244.)     »'  Bishop  M'Kendree  and  Mr.  O.  Kelly 
actually  withdrew,  because  of  the  unwarrantable 
assumptions  of  the  conference."  (Ibid.  p.  244.) 
*'  And  Ezekiel  Cooper,  of  the  Philadelphia  con 


248  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

ferencGj  asserts,  that  in  debate  Mr.  M'Kendree 
observed,  *  //  is  an  insult  to  my  understandings 
and  such  an  arbitrary  stretch  of  power,  so  tyran- 
nical (or  despotic)  that  I  cannot  (or  will  not)  sub- 
mit to  it.'"  (Ibid.  p.  244.)  But  the- following 
particulars,  extracted  from  a  letter  of  Dr.  S.  S. 
Schmucker,  Professor  of  Theology  in  the  Ger- 
man Lutheran  Seminary  at  Gettysburg,  will  set 
the  question  of  Methodist  clerical  aristocracy  at 
rest.  After  defining  an  aristocracy  to  mean, 
"  the  exclusive  assumption  or  possession,  ly  a 
feuu  of  those  rights  and  privileges,  to  which  oth- 
ers have  a  just  claim,"  Dr.  S.  enumerates  the  fol- 
lowing examples  of  Methodist  clerical  usurpa- 
tion: 1.  ^^  The  exclusive  right  of  suffrage  in 
the  election  of  delegates  to  the  general  conference 
and  of  bishops."  A  thing  unknown  in  any  other 
protestant  church. 

2.  '*  Exclusive  eligibility  both  to  the  annual 
und  general  conferences.^^  In  all  other  protes- 
tant churches,  laymen  are  eligible  to  the  church 
courts. 

3.  *'  The  exclusive  unlimited  power  to  legislate 
for  the  whole  church  in  matters  of  doctrine,  dis- 
cipline, and  forms  of  worship  and  minor  regula- 
tions. The  travelling  preachers  can  change  and 
reverse  whenever    they    please,  avery    item  of 


ARMINIAN    METHODlSItf.  944 

doctrine,*  discipline,  and  forms  of  worship,  and 
no  layman,  nor  even  local  pieacher,  can  have  a 
word  to  say  in  it. 

4.  "TVie  exclusive  right  to  sit  in  judgment  on 
the  moral  conduct  of  travelling  preachers.'*  In 
other  churches  such  trials  are  conducted  by  lay- 
men and  ministers  jointly. 

5.  "  The  exclusive  right  of  appointing  all  com- 
mittees for  the  trial  of  lay  members,  without  the 
power  on  the  part  of  the  accused,  to  challenge 
any  member  of  such  committee,  though  he  could 
prove  him  his  bitterest  enemy. 

6.  "  The  exclusive  right  to  conduct  and  con- 
trol the  book  concern,  and  appropriate  its  exten- 
sive profits  exclusively  to  their  own  benefit. 

7.  *'  The  exclusive  rigLt  of  eligibilily  to  the 
editorship  of  the  periodicals  of  the  Methodist 

*  It  may  perhaps  be  questioned  by  some  whether  the 
preachers  have  power,  according'  to  the  Discipline,  to 
change  the  doctrines  of  the  MctJiodist  church.  It  is  ad. 
mitted  that  among  the  provisions  for  altering  and  amen- 
ding the  Book  of  Discipline,  it  is  said,  '^excepiing  the 
Jirst  article"  which  relates  to  doctrine.  But  cannot  the 
same  power  which  inserted  that  exception,  strike  it  out  ? 
Cannot  a  majority  ot  the  General  Conference  erase  that 
exception  whenever  they  please  ?  The  way  is  then  open 
to  abolish  every  doctrine  of  the  system,  and  substitute  in 
its  stead  any  othsr  ism  which  pleases  them  best.  The 
people  are  therefore  absolutely  dependent  upon  the  preach- 
ers,  whether  the  Methodist  Episcopal  <  hurch  is  Univer- 
salist,  Socinian,  or  Popish  in  her  doctrinal  testimony' 
21 


S4S  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

church  :  local  preachers  and  laymen  are  excluded 
by  the  Discipline. 

S.  "  The  exclusive  right  to  hold  and  control 
all  the  Methodist  churches  and  parsonages,  deed- 
ed a-^cordin^  to  the  Discipline — to  say  who  shall 
and  who  shall  not  occupy  them,  without  consult- 
ing the  wishes  of  the  laity  wlio  paid  for  them. 
Even  the  trustees  are  nominated  exclusively  by 
the  travelling  preachers.  In  every  other  protes- 
lant  church  in  the  land,  each  congregation  has 
control  of  its  own  parsonage  and  church  proper- 

0.  ««77ie  exclusive  right  to  fix  their  owh  sala- 
ry, that  is,  the  amount  to  which  they  may  retain 
possession  of  their  collections,  and  receive  divi- 
dends from  the  several  funds.  In  every  other 
church,  the  people  decide  for  themselves  what 
sum  they  will  allow  their  minister. 

10.  "77ie  exclusive  right  of  their  bishops  to 
determine  what  minister  each  congregation  shall 
have,  without  consulting  the  wishes  of  the  peo- 
ple. In  all  other  churches  of  our  land,  the  con- 
gregation invites  the  person  they  think  best  suited 
to  them. 

11.  "./^;i  entire  irresponsibility  to  the  people 
for  all  their  acts,  legislative,  judicial,  and  execu- 
tive, and  for  the  distribution  of  the  extensive 
funds  possessed  by  them.     They  print  no  min- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  24tf 

utes  of  their  discussions,  (except  the  mere  ap- 
pointment of  ministers  to  circuits,) — they  do  not 
admit  the  laity  even  as  auditors  of  their  delibera- 
tions ;  and  no  power  on  earth  can  call  them  to 
account."  Thus  far  Dr.  Schmucker.  We  are 
now  prepared  to  understand  Dr.  Bangs,  when  he 
asserts  in  his  "Vindication" — *' Every  part  of 
our  government  is  elective."  But  who  are  the 
voters?  The  recerend  clergy.  And  is  not  the 
Pope  elected  by  his  reverend  cardinals  ? 

There  is  one  point,  liowever,  in  the  above  cat- 
alogue of  usurpations,  which  demands  a  more  spe- 
cial notice.  It  is  the  8th  head,  respecting  the 
right  of  church  property,  which  is  deeded  away 
to  the  preachers,  and  is  placed  entirely  beyend 
the  control  of  the  people.  It  is  true,  the  form  of 
deed  in  the  Discipline,  (p.  1G2,)  conveys  the 
property  to  trustees  in  the  first  instance — But 
mark!  It  is  "in  trust  that  they  shall  build  a 
house  or  place  of  worship  for  the  use  of  the  mem^ 
bers  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States,  according  to  the  rules  and  disci- 
pline c'jhich,  from  time  to  time,  may  be  agreed 
on  and  adopted  by  the  preachers  of  said  church.** 
"  And  in  farther  trust  that  they  shall  at  all  times 
permit  such  preachers''^ — "to  preach  and  ex- 
pound God's  holy  word  therein,"  &c.,  &c. 
The  property,  then,  is  for  the  use  of  the  people 


847  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

according  to  the  rules  adopted  by  the  preachers^ 
and  they  can  have  the  use  of  it  no  h>nger  than 
they  quietly  submit  to  those  rules,  however  un- 
just or  oppressive  they  may  be.  All  that  is  ne- 
cessary, therefore,  to  enable  an  avaricious  priest- 
hood to  take  quiet  possession  of  the  immense 
and  accumulating  property  of  the  Methodist  Epis- 
copal Church,  is  to  enact  rules  sufficieiitly  op- 
pressive to  force  away  the  people,  and  the  whole 
wealth  of  the  church  is  theirs,  deeded,  and  con- 
firmed to  them  forever.*  Besides,  without  sup- 
posing an  act  of  tyranny  so  high-handed,  if  a  Me- 
thodist Episcopal  congregation  unanimoitsly  re- 
solve to  unite  with  another  denomination  of  Chris- 
tians, say  the  Protestant  Methodists,  they  are 
obliged  to  surrender  their  house  of  worship,  to 
forsake  the  temple  v, hich  their  labors  and  wealth 
had  reared  for  their  accommodation,  to  letive   aU 

*  In  defence  of  tins  feature  of  the  system,  it  Iras  been 
eaid,  that  if  "the  preachers  cease  to  be  Method\sts,  they 
have  no  riglit  to  the  use  of  the  meeting  iiousvs,  and  the 
same  is  true  of  the  mpiniersV  But  is  it  trvie  that  any 
conferejicc  of  pre:.eKers  have  the  right  to  njuke  laws,  ine 
purport  of  which  is — "If  vou,the  peopl'j,  exerci  e  yrur 
rights  of  conscience,  and  '■cease  to  he  Methcdis!s,''  you 
must  leave  your  propert}'  iji  our  ha^.ids — it  is  yours  no 
longer"?  Is  this  tolcrution  or  rer.gions  liberty  ?  Who 
gives  the  preachers  a  right  to  impose  a  tax  of  this  kind 
upon  as  many  of  their  people  a-^  become  tired  of  their  ec- 
cicsiastical  supervision?  TKc  law  of  God  will  regard 
property  thus  obtained  as  "t,iie  wages  of  unrighteousnep," 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  248 

in  tlie  hands  of  Methodist  Episcopal  preachers^ 
and  commence  anew  from  the  foundation.  They 
cannot  touch  a  cent  of  it.  The  property  is  theirs 
no  longer  than  they  continue  obedient  and  faith- 
ful servants  of  the  preachers,  and  submit  to  be  go- 
verned by  their  rules.  And  if  every  Methodist 
congregation  in  the  land  were  successively  to  re- 
nounce the  system,  unanimously  renounce  it, 
they  could  not  keep  possession  of  a  cent  of  their 
property — it  must  lie  in  the  hands  of  the  preach- 
ers to  be  disposed  of  according  to  their  "rw/es.'* 
A  congregation  may  wish  to  make  sale  of  the 
house  they  have  erected  out  of  their  own  funds : 
but  no  !  they  dare  not.  And  even  when,  in  case 
of  debt,  the  trustees  are  authorized  to  sell  the  pro- 
perty to  pay  it,  the  surplus  is  deposited  (not  in 
the  hands  of  the  trustees,  or  returned  to  those  who 
are  its  lawful  owners,  but)  "  i/i  the  hands  of  the 
steward,  to  be  at  the  disposal  of  the  next  annual 
conference''^ — It  is  added,  indeed,  "yb?'  the  use 
of  said  society''^ — as  much  as  to  say,  ^^  we,  the 
preachers,  think  you,  the  rightful  owners,  do  not 
knoiv  what  use  to  make  of  your  money — we  will 
kindly  relieve  you  of  the  burden  of  it."  To  al- 
lege that  the  preachers  of  the  Methodist  Episco- 
pal Church  will  always  be  men  of  too  much  pro- 
bity and  uprightness  to  abuse  the  power  placed  in 
their  hands,  is  only  to  show  the  extreme  credu- 
21* 


1240  THE    DIFFICULTIKS    OF 

lity  of  the  objector.  All  history  testifies  that  the 
direct  method  to  corrupt  the  best  of  men,  is  to 
place  at  their  disposal  unlimited  and  uncontrolled 
power,  whether  of  wealth,  or  any  other  kind  of 
influence. 

But  it  has  been  replied,  that  the  travelling  prea- 
chers cannot  righteously  be  charged  with  being  a 
clerical  aristocracy,  because  "  they  have  left  in 
the  hands  of  the  laity  the  all-important  power  of 
withholding  every  cent  of  pecuniary  support." 
And  Dr.  Bangs,  in  his  "Vindication,"  chap.  10, 
on  ♦'  the  privileges  of  members  of  our  church," 
states  the  third  to  be,  that  "  no  member  can  be 
censured  for  not  conliibuting  to  the  support  of 
the  ministry."  Is  it  indeed  so  ?  On  page  171 
of  tlie  Book  of  Discipline,  (cd.  1S3'2,)  is  a  rule  re- 
quiring ^^  weekly  class  coUeelions  whenever  it  is 
practicable,"  to  meet  the  allowances  to  the  preach- 
ers, (fee.  And  on  page  90,  they  say,  that  in  "  ca- 
ses of  neglect  of  duties  o{ any  kind — or  disobedi- 
ence to  the  order  and  discipline  of  the  church," 
the  oilender  is  on  the  third  offence  to  be  "cut 
off"  or  excommunicated.  Now  is  it  a  duty  of 
*♦  any  kind^''''  or  any  part  of  the  "  order  and  dis- 
cipline "  to  contribute  at  the  class  collections  ? 
Then,  on  the  third  instance  of  neglect  to  pay  the 
preacher,  all  orthodox  Methodists  enjoy  the  pre- 
'-^ous  privilege  of  being  regularly  excluded  from 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  250 

the  church!  No!  Rely  upon  it.  The  trouble 
of  making  and  executing  laws  for  the  government 
of  the  brethren,  is  not  to  go  unrewarded — the  la- 
borer is  worthy  of  his  hire.  The  preachers  bear 
the  burden  of  exclusive  legislation — they  relieve 
the  people  of  all  part  and  lot  in  that  matter.  Is 
it  not  right  that  they  should  be  punished,  if  they 
refuse  to  be  taxed  for  these  inestimable  "  privile- 
ges"? 

The  ultimate  tendencies  of  a  system  such  as 
we  have  been  examining,  present  to  the  inquisi- 
tive mind  a  melancholy  prospect.  The  experi- 
ence of  all  popish  countries  proves,  that  the  most 
direct  metliod  of  enslaving  any  people  in  a  ])olili- 
cal  point  of  view,  is,  to  take  from  them  their  in- 
dependence in  religion.  Bring  them  to  commit 
the  safe-keeping  of  their  consciences  to  the  priests, 
and  to  suffer  the  privilege  and  right  of  self-gov- 
ernment in  religion  to  pass  into  the  hands  of  oth- 
ers— persuade  them  to  surrender  the  right  of  think- 
ing and  acting  like  Christian  freemen,  and  you 
have  a  people  prepared,  on  the  first  opportunity, 
to  submit  the  trouble  of  political  rule  to  any  aspi- 
ring demagogue  who  mny  volunteer  his  services. 
The  habit  of  implicit  submission  to  the  dictation 
of  others,  is  soon  formed ;  and  what  vi^as  at  first 
esteemed  a  precious  right,  will  soon  come  to  be  re- 
warded as  an  oppressive  burden.     The  spirit  of 


251  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

lofty  independence  will  he  broken,  and  ihe  man 
will  be  merged  in  the  abject  slave.  The  British 
monarch,  James  I.,  had  some  skill  in  this  mailer. 
When  assigning  a  reason  for  wishing  to  put  down 
presbytery,  and  elevate  episcopacy,  he  delivered 
the  royal  maxim — "  no  bishop,  no  king  " — lie  ut- 
tered a  sentiment  which  has  been  repeated  a  thou- 
sand times  as  a  favorite  and  acknowledged  princi- 
ple, by  the  enemies  of  civil  and  religious  liberty. 
So  also  a  writer  in  the  London  Quarterly  Review, 
a  work  devoted  to  the  interests  of  episcopacy  and 
toryism,  uses  the  following  strong  language: 
*'  Certain  it  is  that  monarchy  and  episcopacy  are 
much  more  nearly  connected  than  "writers  of  had 

faith  or  little  reflection  have  sought  to  persuade 
mankind."  "  There  is  an  insensible,  but  natural 
inclination  towards  democracy,'''  says  the  same 
writer,  "  which  arises  from  the  principles  of  a 

popular  church  government.^'  *  On  the  other 
hand,   the    natural    alliance  between   a  popular 

*  The  unhappy  Charles,  during  his  conflicts  witli  the 
Parliament,  was  urged  to  give  his  consent  to  abolish 
Episcopacy.  This  lie  reiu.'<;cd,  because,  among  other 
things,  Episcopacy  was  more  friendly  to  monurchy  than 
Preshytery.  "Show  nic,"  said  he,  "any  precedent  where 
presbyterial  government  and  regal  were  together,  without 
perpetual  rebellions."  "And  it  cannot  be  otherwise  for 
the  ground  of  their  fZocfrine  is  anti-monarchical."  "There 
was  not  a  wiser  man  since  Solomon,  than  he  who  said, 
•no  bishop,  ho  king.' "  (Miller's  Letters,  p.  24.) 


J 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  252 

church  government  and  civil  liberty,  has  been  al- 
ternalely  the  theme  of  prai^-se  from  its  friends,  and 
of  reproach  from  its  enemies,  from  time  immemo- 
rial. Clarendon  and  Hums  acknowjedge  it  in 
all  the  bitterness  of  their  hostility.  (See  Dr.  Mil- 
ler's letter  to  a  gentleman  of  Baltimore,  pp.  74, 
75.) 

In  the  light  of  these  observations,  we  are  pre- 
pared to  appreciate  the  zeal  with  whi<-h,  some 
years  since,  Methodist  preachers  re-echoed  the 
hue  and  cry  of  infidels,  that  t!ie  civil  a  id  religions 
liberty  of  the  country  was  in  danger  f.om  Presby  le- 
rianism.*    The  communiiy  seem  to  have  forgotten 

*  M.iny  persfn".  will  remember  the  lime  and  eircam- 
stances  o"  this  disgrace. ul  vAWir.  Tiicir  great  paper, 
The  C;in-i.-tian  Advocate  and  .Tournal,  published  an  article 
entitled,  ''Mirdtr  vill  ovi,''''  proiest^ing  to  discover  to  the 
world  some  dreadul  C(.n;pir.  cy  which  tlie  Presbyterians 
were  plotting  against  the  civil  and  religious  liberties  of 
the  country — designing  to  unite  the  Presbyterian  church 
with  the  civil  government,  and  hold  the  posts  of  honor 
and  emolument  in  their  own  h^nds.  Oi"  course  their 
Clergy  were  to  reap  the  rich  rewards  of  the  successful 
execution  of  this  scheme!  Twenty  or  thirty  thousand 
copies  of  this  infidel  publicntion  immediately  issued  from 
New  York,  and  the  circuit  riders  were  tiyj'ig  from  one 
end  of  the  land  to  the  other,  bearing  the  important  news. 
Their  pulpits  and  even  the  day  of  rest  were  employed  to 
trumpet  the  wonderful  discovery!  '' I  do  believe,"  said 
one  of  these  ardent  patriots,  "  they  are  secretly  combi- 
ning  to  get  their  religion  cstabhshed;  and  I  would  have 
no  hesitancy  in  advancing  the  above  ideas  and  language 
from  the  pulpit."  (Letter  of  a  circuit  rider,  dated  August 
5.  1829.) 


263  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

that  this  crusade  was  preached  l)y  the  very  men 
whose  form  of  ecclesiastical  government  is  in  di- 
rect contrast  with  our  republican  institutions  ;  and 
whose  spiritual  forefathers  were  those  preachers 
who,  wliilst  Dr.  AVitherspoon  and  a  host  of  kin- 
dred spirits  were  nobly  stemming  the  tide  of  op- 
pression, basely  fled  from  the  land  of  their  adop- 
tion, and  consigned  her  sons  to  tlie  sword  of  ty- 
ranny, the  doom  of  rebels.  "  During  the  revolu- 
tionary war,"  says  Dr.  Bangs,  "  all  the  preach- 
ers, except  Mr.  Asbury,  returned  to  their  native 
land."  *  Yes,  they  loved  their  <'  native  land  " 
too  well  to  find  rest  for  tlie  sole  of  their  foot  in  a 
country  where  grinding  oppression  had  roused 
the  spirit  of  independence,  and  tories  had  fallen 
into  disrepute.  "  All  the  MeiJiodists  there,"  says 
Wesley,  "  were  firm  for  the  government,  (that  is, 
were  all  tories,)  and  on  that  account  were  perse- 
cuted by  the  rebch.    Wesley's  Works,  vol.  3,  p. 


*  Mr.  Asbury,  it  is  understood,  concealed  himself 
among'  the  tories  of  the  State  of  Delaware.  And  yet 
when  the  storm  had  scarce  blown  over,  tlieir  patriotism 
bursts  into  a  blaze ;  and  brshops  Coke  and  Asbury  ])re- 
sent  an  address  to  General  \Vashi  igton,  in  which  they 
speak  of  "our  civil  and  religious  liberties  transmitted  to 
us  by  the  Providence  ofGod  and  the  glorious  revolution''''! 
And  '■■the  viost  excellent  constitution  of  these  States,  at 
present  tlie  admiration  of  the  world,  and  its  great  exem- 
-plar  for  iijiitation'''' I !  (Sec  Armiuian  Mag-azinc,  vol,  1, 
p.?JS4.) 


i 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM,  254 

411.  Yet  this  is  the  sort  of  men  who  are  so  jea- 
lous for  our  liberties,  and  so  prompt  to  detect  and 
expose  Presbyterian  encroachmenls  ! 

Nor  should  it  be  forgotten,  that  these  pr^triotic 
preachers,  who,  in  the  language  ofihe  founder  of 
their  system,  ^^  are  no  republicans  (in  ecclesiasti- 
cal matters)  and  never  intend  to  5e,"  are  in  the 
constant  practice  o^  circulating,  by  means  of  their 
book  concern,  sentiments  which  are  high  tory 
and  'treasonable.  The  following  passages  from 
the  third  volume  of  Wesley's  Sermons,  pp.  406, 
40S,  will  illustrate  our  meaning — "  Thus,"  says 
he,  "  we  have  observed  each  of  these  wheels 
apart — on  the  one  hand,  trade,  wealth,  luxury, 
sloth,  and  Avantonness,  spreading  far  and  wide 
through  the  American  provinces  ;  on  the  other, 
the  spirit  of  independency  diffusing  itself  from 
north  to  south.  Let  us  observe  how  the  wise 
and  grxicious  providence  of  God  uses  one  to  check 
the  other,  and  even  employs,  (if  so  strong  an  ex- 
pression may  be  allowed)  Satan  to  cast  out  Sa- 
tan. Probably  that  subtle  spirit  (the  devil)  ho- 
ped by  adding  to  all  those  other  vices  the  sinrlt  of 
independency,  to  have  overturned  the  whole  work 
of  God,  as  well  as  the  British  government  in 
North  America."  So  it  seems  that  independence 
and  the  overthrow  of  the  British  government  in 
this  country,  were  the  works  of  the  devil!  Again: 


255  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

*♦  The  spirit  of  independence  which  our  poet  so 
justly  terms  *  the  glorious  fault  of  angels  and  of 
gods,'  (that  is  in  plain  terms,  of  devils,)  the  same 
which  so  many  call  liberty,  is  overruled  by  the 
justice  and  mercy  of  God."  This  is  truly  a  bright 
picture  of  our  glorious  revolution,  and  of  the 
principal  actors  in  its  trying  scenes.  Their  love 
of  liberty  was  after  all,  only  "  the  glorious  fault 
of  devils"  !  We  could  cover  with  the  mantle  of 
charity  the  weakness  and  errors  of  John  Wesley, 
a  British  suliject,  and  a  staunch  royalist;  but 
when  we  behold  these  self-constituted  guardians 
of  our  liberties,  these  zealous  watchmen,  eager  to 
sound  the  alarm  of  approaching  danger,  from  the 
ambitious  design-^  of  Presbyterians — when  we 
find  these  incorruptible  patriots  sending  out,  as 
on  the  wings  of  the  four  winds  of  heaven,  thou- 
sands and  tens  of  thousands  of  copies  of  a  work, 
which  breathes  the  very  spirit  of  toryism  and 
treason^  it  is  difficult  to  find' a  covering  wide 
enough  to  hide  their  guilt  and  shame. 

Further:  If  the  overthrow  of  the  British  prw- 
cr  and  the  establishment  of  American  indepen- 
dence, were  the  WORKS  OF  THE  DEVIL,  as 
Wesley  affirms,  and  the  preachers  print  and  pub- 
lish to  the  world,  must  they  not  feel  themselves 
bound  to  destroy  the  works  of  the  devil  ?  Are 
"we  then  to  understand  that  the  Methodist  hierar- 


ARailNIAN    METHODISM.  8&5 

ehy  is  leagued  together  to  overthrow  our  repub" 
lican  institutions  ?  And  are  we  farther  to  un- 
derstand that  the  charge  against  Presbj'^terianism 
of  "secretly  combining"  against  the  liberties  of 
the  country,  Avas  only  a  piece  of  generalship,  a 
skilful  diversion  in  favor  of  their  ovi^n  deep  con- 
spiracy ! ! 

But  if  the  preachers  really  disapprove  of  ascri- 
bing our  independence  to  the  agency  of  Satan, 
why  do  they  print  and  circulate  such  sentiments? 
*'  Behold,"  says  one  of  their  number,*  "because 
the  publishers  of  his  (Wesley's)  sermons  have 
not  seen  fit  to  mutilate  the  volumes^  they  are  de- 
nounced as  anti-republican,  &;c."     To  mutilate 
the  volumes  !     To  mutilate  is  "  to    deprive   of 
some  essential part.^^     And  are  those  "  essential 
parts  "  of  a  volume  of  sermons,  which  ascribe 
our  liberty  and  independence  to  the  devil !     We 
should  like  to  inquire  whether  the  preachers  re- 
gard the  tory  and  treasonable  sentiments  uttered 
by  Wesley,  as  true  or  false  ?     If  they  say  they 
are  true,  then  do  they    confess    themselves   as 
staunch  tories  as  ever  their  spiritual  forefathers 
were.     But  if  they  say  they  are  falsei  then  we 
ask,  would  it  mutilate  a  volume  of  sermons  to 
omit  its  falsehood!     Or  do  these  preachers  and 

*  Rev.  Charles   Cooke,  stationed   preacher   in  Pitted 
burgh. 


838  THB    DIFFICULTIES    Of 

publishers  regard  falsehood  as  ^n^' essential parV 
of  a  volume  of  sermons  ?  But  are  these  gentle- 
men always  so  excessively  scrupulous  in  the  mat- 
ter of  mutilating  volumes  ?  Do  they  not  publish 
the  works  of  Calvinistic  authors,  retaining  their 
names,  whilst  every  shred  of  the  peculiarities  of 
Calvinism  is  eviscerated  and  suppressed  ?  Or  is 
it  only  Arminian  toryism  that  must  not  be  mutila- 
ted? 

We  cannot  but  hope  that  the  foregoing  state- 
ment of  facts,  will  henceforth  impose  silence  on 
the  preachers  in  regard  to  the  dark  designs  of 
Presbyterians.     And  if  they    should  commence 
the  work  of"  mutilation,''^  we  would  suggest  the 
following  additional  passages  as  not  unworthy  of 
their  attention,  along  with  the  extracts  from  the 
Sermons — viz  :  **  The  supposition  that  the  peo- 
ple are  the  origin  of  power,  is  every  way  indefen- 
sible."    *'  You  (Aanericans)  profess  to  be  conten- 
ding for  liberty,  but  it  is  a  vain,  empty  pro- 
fession,''^ &c.     But  the  best  is  yet  to  come.  ''No 
governments  under  heaven  are  so  DESPOTIC 
as  the  REPUBLICAN :  no  subjects  are  govern- 
ed in  so  arbitrary  a  manner  as  those  of  a  common- 
wealth.'*    *♦  Should  any  man  talk  or  write  of  the 
Dutch  government  as  every  cobbler  does  of  the 
English,  he  would  be  laid  in  irons  before  he  knew 
whera  h«  wa«.     And  wo  be  to  him.     REPUB- 


ARMINIAN   METHODISM.  £57 

Lies  SHOW  NO  MERCY."  These  tory  sen- 
timents are  scattered  among  the  families  of  thia 
republic  as  the  opinions  of  the  man  who,  they 
are  taught  to  believe,  was  only  not  infallible. 
(See  Works  of  Wesley,  Vol.  3,  pp.  130—134. 

In  contrast  with  this  singular  medley  of  Metho- 
dist Episcopacy,  let  us  hear  the  venerable  Di*. 
Miller  describe  the  episcopacy  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament and  of  good  sense  : 

"  We  suppose,"  remarks  Dr.  M.,  "  thatthera 
is  properly  speaking,  but  one  order  of  gospel  mi- 
nisters ;  that  every  regular  pastor  of  a  congrega- 
tion is  a  Scriptural  bishop;  or  that  every  presby- 
ter who  has  been  set  apart  "  by  the  laying  on  of 
the  hands  of  the  presbytery,''^  (1  Tim.  4:14,)  who 
has  the  pastoral  charge  of  a  particular  church,  is, 
to  all  intents  and  purposes,  a  bishop;  having  a 
right,  in  company  with  others,  his  equals,  to  or- 
dain and  to  perform  every  service  pertaining  to  the 
episcopal  office."  *'  We  suppose  that  there  are 
indeed,  two  other  classes  of  church  officers,  viz., 
ruling  elders  and  deacons;  but  that  neither  of 
these  are  authorized  to  labor  in  word  and  doctrine, 
or  to  administer  the  Christian  sacraments.  We 
suppose  there  is  a  plain  distinction  made  in  Scrip- 
ture between  elders  who  only  rule,  and  eldera 
who  also  ^labor  in  word  and  doctrine,^  (I  Tim. 
6:17:)"  Letters,  p,  5. 


258  THK    DIFFICCLTIES    OF 

*'  Our  judicatories,  from  the  highest  to  the  low- 
est, are  all  made  up  of  laymen  as  well  as  clergy- 
men ;  and  in  all  of  them,  excepting  the  highest, 
if  the  laity  exercise  their  rights,  there  will  be  a 
larger  number  of  the  former  than  of  the  latter; 
and  io  the  highest  judicatory,  an  equal  number. 
This,  of  course,  gives  to  the  laity  of  our  commu- 
nion constant  and  intimate  access  to  all  our  plans 
and  measures,  and  all  the  opportunity  that  can  bo 
desired  to  exercise  their  full  share  of  power  in 
controlling  those  measures.  The  people  cannot 
be  oppressed,  unless  they  conspire  to  oppress 
themselves ! "  (Letter  to  a  gentleman  of  Balli- 
more,  p.  72.)  This"conclusive  reasoning  would 
doubtless  lack  most  of  its  force,  if  the  laym.en  of 
whom  Dr.  M.  speaks,  were,  like  the  "  class  lead- 
ers, stewards,  trustees,  and  exhorters, "  of  Me- 
thodism, indebted  exclusively  to  the  preachers 
for  their  appointment  or  nomination  :  But  this  is 
80  far  from  being  the  fact,  that  the  laymen  who 
participate  in  all  the  councils  of  Presbyterianism, 
are  the  representatives  of  the  congregations,  cho- 
sen by  a  majority  of  votes,  and  delegated  by  their 
own  deliberate,  uncontrolled  choice  and  designa- 
tion, to  this  special  <luty.  This  is  literally  the 
fact  in  every  instance,  in  regard  to  the  three  low- 
er forms  of  judicatory  :  and  may  be  literally  true 
of  their  appointment  to  the  highest,  whenever  tho 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  259 

Jaity  exercise^their  constitutional  right  to  have  a 
majority  in  the  presbyteries"which  elect  the  dele- 
gates. 

But  the  inquiry'may  here  arise — Is  there  any 
Scriptural  warrant  for  a  system  of  church  govern- 
ment so  thoroughly  republican  as  this  ?     Does 
the  w^ord  of  God  authorize  the  commitment  of  ec- 
clesiastical power  so  entirely  into  the  hands  of 
the  people  ?     In  reply  we  refer  to  the  record  of 
the  appointment  of  deacons,  in  the  6th  chapter  of 
Acts.     Let  the  inquirer  open  his  Bible  and  read — 
**  The  twelve  called  the  multitude  of  the  disciples 
unto  them    and   said — Brethren,    look   YE    out 
among  you  seven  men,  whom  we  may  appoint 
over  this  business.     And  the  saying  pleased  the 
whole  multitude,  and  THEY  CHOSE  Stephen 
and  Philip,"  &;c.     (Not  the  preachers,  nor  bish- 
ops, nor  even  the  apostles  chose  them  :  not  even 
inspired  apostles  would  venture  to  take  the  right 
of  election    out   of  the   hands    of  the  people.) 
<'  "Whom,"  continues  the  record,  "  THEY  set 
before  the  apostles,  and  when  they  had  prayed, 
they  laid  their  hands  on  them."     Can  any  thing 
be  more  evident  than  that  the  first  deacons  were 
elected  by  the  voice  of  the  people,  or  by  « the 
whole  midtitude  of  the  disciples''  ?   "Now  turn 
to  the  32d  page  of  the  Methodist  Book  of  Disci- 
pline— "  How  is  a  travelling  deacon  constituted?" 
22* 


230  THT    r;fl'lcrf.TlCS    OF 

*•  By  the  election  " — of  the  people  ?  of  the  whole 
multitude  of  the  disciples?  No!  but  '*of  the 
majorily  of  the  yearly  conference^''''  which  is  com- 
posed exclusively  o{ preachers;  not  a  solitary  lay- 
man holding  a  scat  among  them.  The  unscrip- 
tural  character  of  this  feature  of  the  system  must 
therefore  be  obvious  to  all.  In  the  days  of  ihe 
apostles,  the  people  chose  their  own  deacons,  but 
Methodism  has  ventured  to  improve  upon  the 
primitive  plan,  and  her  preachers  exercise  a  pow- 
er which  apostles  did  not  dare  lo  aspume.* 

Again:  we  refer  the  reader  to  ihe  15lh  chap- 
ter of  Acts,  for  further  proof  of  Scriptural  repub- 
licanism :  *♦  Certain  men  which  came  down  from 
Judea  taught  the  brethren — '  Except  ye  be  cir- 
cumcised,' (fcc;  they  (the  brethren)  determined 
that  Paul  and  Barnabas  and  certain  other  of  them 
(the  brethren)  should  go  up  to  Jerusalem — they 
were  received  of  Me  church,  and  of  the  apostles, 
and  elders — And  the  apostles  and  elders  came  to- 
gether to  consider  of  this  matter.  Then  pleased 
it  the  apostles  and  elders,  unth  the  whole  churchy 
to  send  chosen  men  of  their  own  company — The 

•  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  Cyprian,  about  the  mid, 
die  of  the  third  century,  quotes  the  same  passage  from 
the  6th  chapter  of  Acts,  to  prove  that  the  chief  power  of 
choosing  worthy  priests,  or  refusing  unworthy  ones,  ia 
lodged  with  the  people  ;  which  power,  he  says,  j)roctede4 
•riginalhj  from  God's  authority.  (D\.  Millei;. 


AnifflXIAN    METHODISM.  261 

apostles,  elders,  and  brethren,  send  greeting — It 
seemed  good  unto  us,  (the  apostles,  elders,  and 
brethren,)  being  assembled  with  one  accord,  to 
send  chosen  men  unto  you,"  &;c.  If  these  pas- 
sages do  not  prove  the  fact,  that  under  the  direc- 
tion of  inspired  apostles,  the  people  did  partici- 
pate in  the  deliberations  and  legislative  acts  of  the 
Synod  of  Jerusalem — if  they  do  not  determine 
the  divine  right  of  private  members  of  the  church 
to  a  share  in  its  government,  it  is  difficult  to  say 
what  evidence  would  suffice.  Bui  suppose  these 
things  had  been  transacted  by  a  Methodist  confe- 
rence, annual  or  general,  How  would  it  have 
read  ?  The  reverend  travelling  pnachers,  (al- 
though the  ^^  brethren^*  had  not  '•<' chosen^^  one 
of  them  '•  to  go  up  "  to  conference,)  came  to^geth- 
er  for  to  consider  of  this  miitter.  Then  pleased 
it  the  reverend  travelling  preachers  to  exclude 
from  their  conference  all  local  preachers,  to  allow 
them  no  seat  nor  vote  in  their  meeting.  It  pleased 
them  also  to  close  the  doors  against  "  the  whole 
multitude  of  the  disciples,*'  "  with  the  whole 
church ;  "  who  were  not  only  denied  the  right  of 
deliberating  and  voting,  but  were  forbidden  to  be 
present  in  the  assembly  even  as  spectators.  And 
when  there  had  been  much  disputing,  a  certain 
bishop,  surnamed  Peter,  rose  up,  and  addressed 
the  preachers.     *'Then  all  the  multitude^*  (of 


263  TnB    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

the  preachers)  kept  silenceTand  gave  audience — 
and  after  he  had  held  his  peace,  bishop  James  de- 
livered a  speech  to  \\\eT^^  whole jfuullitude'"  of 
preachers.  Then  pleased  it  the  reverend  travel- 
ling preachers,  «'  ivith  the  whole  church  "  of  tra- 
velling preachers,  to  send  chosen  men  to  Antioch. 
And  they  wrote  letters—"  The  travelling  preach- 
ers, with  *  the  hrethren,'  who  are  also  travelling 
preachers,  send  greeting — It  seemed  good  unto 
US,  the  travelling  preachers,''^  <kc.,  &c.  Now 
in  this  portrait,  we  have  merely  supposed  the 
aposdes  to  have  been  good  Methodists — that  they 
sat  in  conference  with  closed  doors,  excluded  all 
laymen  and  local  preachers  from  a  seat  and  vote 
in  their  councils,  and  after  having  been  self-ap- 
pointed to  conference,  that  they  took  the  whole 
business  of  legislation  out  of  the  hands  of  the  peo- 
ple. We  have  also  substituted  the  words  "  trav- 
elling preachers  "  in  the  place  of  "  the  brethren," 
"  all  the  multitude,"  "  the  whole  church,"  &c., 
as  they  occur  in  the  15th  chapter  of  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles.  It  would  be  manifestly  absurd  to 
speak  of  "all  themultitude,"  "thejwhole  church," 
*Hhe  brethren,"  as  being  present,  "  giving  audi- 
ence," and  uniting  in  the  business  of  legislation, 
in  a  Methodist  conference,  where  they  are  not 
permitted  to  be  present,  even  as  a  part  of  the  au- 
dience.    In  this  mirror,  then,  the  candid  inqui- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  263 

rer  may  see  at  one  view,  the  republicanism  of 
Scripture,  and  the  aristocracy  of  Methodism. 
Nor  will  he  feel  surprise  to  find  Dr.  Bangs  in  his 
*'  Vindication,"  express  his  fears  for  a  "  ministry 
under  the  control  and  at  the  mercy  of  the  peo- 
ple,'" p.  158.  Doubtless  Dr.  B.  thinks  it  much 
safer  to  have  the  peojjle  under  the  control  and  at 
the  mercy  of  the  preachers  ! 

Such  then,  in  the  language  of  another,  is  Epis- 
copal Methodism — an  anomaly  in  the  midst  of 
our  free  institutions.  Her  mother,  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church,  it  is  well  known,  admits  the 
principle  of  lay  representation.  So  that  excep- 
ting her  grandmother  of  Rome,  she  is  the  only 
church  in  America  that  is  not  blessed  with  **  the 
liberty  wherewith  Christ  hath  made  us  free,** 


864  TUB  DirFicuLTiEs  or 


LETTER    Vill. 

Articles  and  Discipline.  Origin  of  the  TFork\ 
Auricular  Confession.  Compensation  and 
Support  of  Preachers. 

Rev.  Sir: 

We  have  had  occasion  in  previous  letters,  to 
mention  repeatedly  the  "  Book  of  Discipline  "  of 
the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  for  the  purpose 
of  directinof  attention  to  some  of  its  singrular  state- 
ments.  We  are  not  done  with  the  subject;  but 
as  it  is  one  of  considerable  interest,  we  propose 
to  confer  upon  it  the  distinction  of  a  separate  in- 
vestigation. This  seems  the  more  proper,  as  it 
is  but  repaying  a  debt  of  long  standing,  and  due 
to  Methodism  for  the  notice  she  has  been  pleased 
to  bestow  upon  the  Presbyterian  Confession  of 
Faith.  • 

X.     Review  of  the  Methodist  Articles  and  Book  of 
Discipline. 

1.  The  origin  cf  the  TVork.  It  will  be  found 
upon  examination,  to  be  neither  more  nor  less 
than  the  Liturgy  and  Articles  of  the  Church  of 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  265 

England,  in  a  mutilated  and  deformed  condition. 
The  original  was  formed,  as  Dr.  Miller  tells  us, 
on  the  basis  of  five  Romish  missals,  or  prayer- 
books,  which  had  been  in  use  in  the  same  num- 
ber of  popish  bishoprics.  This  liturgy  at  first 
contained  a  number  of  things  grossly  popish  ;  and 
even  after  undergoing  a  "considerable  purgation," 
as  Dr.  M.  has  it,  by  Calvin  and  others,  still  re- 
tained a  "  number  of  articles,  adopted  from  the 
missals  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  which  exceed- 
ingly grieved  the  more  pious  and  evangelical  part 
of  the  church,  but  which  the  Queen  (Elizabeth) 
and  her  clergy  refused  to  exclude."  These  facts 
will  fully  account  for  the  savor  of  popery  which, 
in  previous  letters,  we  detected  in  the  form  of  ad- 
ministering the  Lord's  Supper  and  in  some  other 
particulars. 

The  dilapidated  state  in  which  we  find  this 
book  in  the  hands  of  Methodists,  was  the  work 
of  John  Wesley.  He  confessed  that  he  had  made 
some  slight  alterations — but  these  alterations  are, 
(besides  many  important  additions  and  omissions* 

*  Mr.  Wesley  himself  says,  there  were  '•  many  psalms 
left  out,  and  many  parts  of  the  others,  as  being  highly  im- 
proper for  the  mouths  of  a  Christian  congregation''''  1  No- 
thing can  justify  such  language  respecting  the  inspired 
word  of  God.  "  All  Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration,  and 
\B  profitable."  It  may  be  supposed,  moreover,  the  17th 
Article  of  the  original  work  would  not  euit  the  Arminian 


266  TH£    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

in  other  parts,)  a  reduction  of  the  thirty-nine  ar- 
ticles to  twenty -Jive.  The  book  in  its  original 
form  was  entirely  too  Calvinistic  for  Mr.  Wesley: 
hence  he  thought  proper  to  expurgate  fourteen 
of  its  doctrinal  articles.  Among  those  rejected 
are  the  fifteenth,  which  asserts  "  that  Christ  alone 
was  without  sin ; "  and  the  eighteenth,  which 
condemns  the  assertion  that  "  every  man  shullbe 
saved  by  the  law  or  sect  ivhich  he  professeth,*' 
and  which  further  affirms  "  that  holy  Scripture 
doth  set  forth  only  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ, 
whereby  rhen  must  be  saved."  "The  name  of 
Jesus  Christ,"  implies  the  belief  of  certain  doc- 
trines, respecting  the  nature  of  the  Savior  and  the 
religion  which  he  taught ;  but  it  is  manifest  that 
Mr.  Wesley  considered  doctrines  or  right  opin- 
ions as  of  little  value,  and  the  religious  feelings 

taste  of  Wesley — it  still  remains,  however,  in  the  Book 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church.  It  is  as  follows: — 
♦*  Predestination  to  life  is  the  everlasting  purpose  of  God, 
whereby,  before  the  foundations  of  the  world  were  laid, 
he  hath  constantly  decreed  by  his  counsel,  secret  to  us, 
to  deliver  from  curse  and  damnation  those  whom  he  hath 
chosen  in  Christ  out  of  mankind^  and  to  brins^  them  by 
Christ  to  everlasting  salvation^  as  vessels  made  to  honor. 
Wherefore,  they  which  are  endued  with  so  excellent  a 
benefit  of  God,  be  called  according  to  God''s  purpose,  by 
his  Spirit  working  in  due  season  :  they  through  grace 
obey  the  calling ;  they  be  justified  freely,"  «fcc.  Calvinis 
tic  election  and  predestination  are  not  more  clearly  taught 
in  the  Westminster  Confession  than  in  this  artielc. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  267 

of  the  true  Methodist  as  the  only  sure  pledge  and 
passport  of  salvation.     Thus  in  his  third  appeal, 
p.  185  :   "I  will  not  quarrel  wiih  you  about  any 
opinions  ;  believe  them  true  or  f  ilse."    And  again 
he  states,  "  the  points  we  chiefly  insisted  upon 
were,  that  orthodoxy  or  right  opinions  is  at  best 
but  a  very  slender  part  of  religion,  if  it  can  be  al- 
lowed to  be  any  part  of  it  at  all."     And  in  his 
sermon  on  the  wedding  garment,  he  calls  ortho- 
doxy or  right  opinions,  *-  trifles,  which  it  is  not 
a  little  sin  to  represent  as  necessary  to  salvation^ 
It  is  true  Mr.  W.  states  his  meaning  to  be  simply 
that  it  is  possible  to  possess  right  views,  of  doc-  ' 
trine,  without  right  affections,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  devils  who."  believe  and  tremble."     But  it  is 
one  thing  to  say,  that  persons  may  entertain  cor- 
rect doctrinal  sentiments,  and  be  destitute  of  piety; 
and  quite  another  thing  to  say  that  right  opini' 
ons  form  no  part  of  piety.     There  may  indeed 
be  orthodoxy  without  religion,   but  no  religion 
without  orthodoxy,  at  least  in  the  great  essentials. 
Such  was  the  origin,  and  such  the  author  of  the 
*'  Book  of  Discipline  "  of  the  Methodist  church.* 

*  After  what  has  been  said,  it  is  not  at  all  surprising 
to  find  Mr.  Wesley  shaking  hands  with  the  Papists  in 
the  following  cordial  style:  "Can  nothing  be  done,  even 
allowing  us  on  both  sides  to  retain  our  own  opinions,  for 
the  softening  our  hearts  towards  each  other."  "My  dear 
friend,  consider  I  am  not  persuading  you  to  leave  or 
23 


268  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

2.     Calvinistic   Articles   and  an   drminian 
Clergy  !     We  have  already  stated  that  the  origi- 
nal work,  from  which  the  English  Episcopal  Li- 
turgy was  derived,  and  which  is  the  parent  stock 
of  the  Methodist  "Articles  and  Discipline,"  was 
submitted  to  the  inspection  of  Calvin  and  some 
other  divines  of  the  continent,  and  by  their  influ- 
ence was  purged  of  a  number  of  its  popish  ex- 
crescences.    This  fact  will  also  in  part  account 
for  the  strong  Calvinism  of  many  of  its  doctrinal 
articles.     But  what  we  wish  particularly  to  re- 
mark, is  that  Wesley,  when  he  undertook  to  Me- 
thodise the  English  Liturgy  and  Articles,  either 
from    not   understanding    his   own   system,    or 
through  inadvertence,  retained  a  number  of  the 
peculiarities  of  the  Calvinistic  theology,  which 
are  still  found  in  the  Methodist  standards.     The 
doctrine  of  "  original  sin,"  taught  in  Article  VIL, 
we  have  already  seen  (Letter  IL)  is  utterly  irre- 
concilable with  other  features  of  the  Arminian 
system.     So  also  *'  the  condition  of  man,"  in  Ar- 
ticle VIIL  is  said  to  be  such,  *'  that  he  cannot 
turn  and  prepare  himself,  by  his  own   natural 

change  your  religion '"'  &c.  "Wc  ought  withoutthis  end- 
less  jangling  about  opinions,  to  provoke  one  another  to 
love  and  to  good  works.  Let  the  points  wherein  we  dif. 
fer,  stand  aside.  Here  are  enough  wherein  we  agree. 
O  brethren,  let  us  not  still  fall  out  by  the  uay'\'  (Letter 
to  a  Roman  Catholic.) 


i 


AR3IIN1AN    METHODISM.  269 

Strength  and  works,  to  faith  and  calling  upon 
God;  wherefore  we  have  no  power  to  do  good 
works  " — "  without  the  grace  of  God  by  Christ, 
preventing  (or  going  before)  us,  that  we  may 
have  a  good  will,  and  working  with  us  when  we 
have  that  good  will  "  Did  the  most  rigid 
Calvinist  ever  teach  human  hjability  in  sivonger 
terms  than  these  ?  "  Cannot,  by  his  own  natural 
strength,  turn  "  / — nay,  more  ;  "  cannot  even 
prepare  himself  to  faith  "  !  And  what  is  strong- 
est— "  Cannot  even  prepare  himself  to  calling 
upon  God''!.  Further — "The  grace  of  God 
must  prevent  (or  go  before)  us,  that  ive  may 
have  a  good  will  and  power  to  do  good  works  ; 
and  work  with  us  when  we  have  that  will.'' 
Why  Paul  himself  did  not  preach  stronger  Calvin- 
ism than  this,  when  he  said,  "It  is  not  of  him 
that  willeth,  nor  of  him  that  runneth,  but  of  God 
thatshoweth  mercy."  So  also  in  Art.  IX.:  *'We 
are  accounted  righteous  before  God  only  for  the 
merit  of  our  Lord,  &c.,  and  not  for  our  own  works 
and  deservings."  And  in  Article  X.  we  are 
XoXAxhai  ^^  good  works,  which,  are  the  fruits  of 
faith,  cannot  endure  the  severity  of  God's  judg- 
ments." All  this,  it  must  be  admitted,  is  sound 
Calvinism,  and  m  one  point,  ultra-Calvin- 
istic.  B.it  \\i\y  hsar  Wesley]  on  the |  subject 
oi ''merit  and  good  works,"     "As  to  merit  it- 


870  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

self,  of  which  we  have  been  so  dreadfully  afraid: 
We  are  rewarded  according  to  our  loorks;  yea, 
because  of  our  ivorks.  How  does  this  differ  from 
^for  the  sake  of  our  works  '  ?  And  how  differs 
this  from  secundum  merita  operum — as  OUR 
WORKS  DESERVE!  Canyon  split  this  hair? 
I  doubt  I  cannot."  (Minutes  of  1770.)  But  this 
is  unmitigated  Arminianism,  or  rather  Pelagian- 
ism.  So  that  with  a  few  slight  improvements, 
the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  may  answer  to 
the  sarcastic  description  drawn  by  a  distinguished 
statesman  of  England,  of  the  established  church 
of  that  country,  viz  :  "Calvinistic  Articles,  a  Po- 
pish Liturgy,  and  an  Arminian  (Clergy  !  " 

3.  Statement  of  the  origin  of  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church  in  Jlinerica.  We  are  told  on 
page  6  of  the  Book  of  Discipline,  that  "Mr.  Wes- 
ley, preferring  the  episcopal  mode  of  church  go- 
ver,.menf,  solemnly  set  apart  by  the  imposition 
of  his  hands  and  prayer,  Thos.  Coke  to  the  epis- 
copal office ;  and  having  delivered  to  him  letters 
of  episcopal  orders,  commissioned  and  directed 
him  to  set  apart  Francis  Asbury  to  the  same  epis- 
copal office."  Now  besides  the  intrinsic  absur- 
dity already  pointed  out,  of  a  priest  ordaining  a 
bishop,  and  the  exceeding  doubtfulness  of  the 
matter  of  fact,  that  Wesley,  who  declared  he 
would  rather  be  called   "  fool,   knave,  villain," 


ARMINL\N    METHODISM,  271 

than  bishop,  should  designate  another  to  bear  the 
office  and  tide  he  so  much  abhorred:^Besides  all 
this,  observe  with  what  authority  the  doctors  of 
Methodism  speak  when  writing  for  the  special 
use  and  benefit  of  the  sect.      Mark  their  language 
— "  episcopl    mode   of    church    government" — 
♦«  episcopal  office" — '*  letters  of  episcopal  orders" 
'*  episcopal  ordination,"    &c.       But   with  what 
commendable  modesty  does  Dr.  Banc's  relate  the 
same  story  in  the  appendix  to  Buck's  Theological 
Dictionary?     How   do   these   proud    pretension 
dwindle,  when  about  to  be  laid  more  fairly  before 
the  public?     The  Doctor  tells  ns  "  that  being  as- 
sisted by  other  presbyters  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, by   prayer   and    imposition    of  hands,   he 
(Wesley)  set  apart  Thomas   Coke,  a  presbyter 
of  said  church,  as  a  superintendent  of  the  Meth- 
odist societies  in  America,"  (not  a  word  about 
his  being  made  a  bishop,  or  receiving  tlie  episco- 
pal office.)     Again ,    "  Mr.    Asbury   being   first 
elected  by  the  unanimous  voice  of  the  preachers, 
was  ordained  by  Dr.  Coke,  first  to  the  office  of 
deacon,  then  elder,  and  then  superintendent  or 
bishop.'''     In  the  Book  of  DiscipHne,  the  state- 
ment says  nothing  about  "  superintendent^'^  it  is 
nothing  but  episcopal  mode  of  church  govern- 
ment, episcopal  ofiice,  episcopal  orders,  episco- 
pal ordination.     But   here  in  the  Appendix  to 
23* 


272  THE    DIFFrCULTIES    OF 

Buck,  it  is  all  superintendent,  and  the  poor  bish- 
op comes  lagging -in  the  rear,  in  the  shape  of  an 
alias,  just  as  though  he  had  been  smuggled  into 
his  present  position  as  slyly  as  possible  to  es- 
cape detection  !  The  very  term  from  which  the 
church  derives  the  name  "  episcopal,"  is  intro- 
duced so  modestly  that  it  might  be  supposed  a 
thing  of  almost  no  importance,  and  not  a  word  is 
uttered  of  those  high  sounding  titles  enumerated 
above. 

If  moreover,  in  the'^Methodist" system,  the 
terms  bishop  and  superintendent  be'synonymous, 
and  both  imply  merely  that  their  possessor  is  an 
elder,  who  on  account  of  age  or  talents  has  re- 
ceivedy?*om  man  a  more  extensive  superintend- 
ence of  ecclesiasticaFaffairs,  than  ordinarily  be- 
longs to  the  eldership ;  why  all  this  pompous 
talk  of  '*  episcopal  ordination,"  "  episcopal  of- 
fice," "letters  of  episcopal  orders,"  &c.?  Why 
this  puerile  affectation  of  high  sounding  tides — 
this  ludicrous  mimicry  o-f  the  English  hierarchy? 
How  would  it  be  more  absurd  to  spenk  of  Pres- 
byterian episcopacy,  since  every  pastor  superin- 
tends a  portion  of  the  church  of  Christ  ?  And 
especially,  is  there  not  something  profane  in  the 
repetition  of  the  solemn  divine  rite  of  ordination, 
(the  New  Testament  knows  nothing  about  "  con- 
secratir"?.  to  the  ministry,")  whenever  an  elder  is 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  273 

appointed  to  a  largev  sphere  of  superintendence, 
than  formerly  he  occupied?  With  about  as  much 
propriety  might  every  Presbyterian  minister  be 
re-ordained,  whenevei  he  is  removed  from  a  nar- 
row, to  an  extensive  circuit  of  influence.  Wheth- 
er therefore  we  consider  the  Methodist  bishop  as 
holding  an  office  of  divine  origin,  essentially  dis- 
tinct from  and  superior  to  that  of  elder — or  re- 
gard these  offices  as  identical,  with  only  enlarged 
powers  received  of  men  on  the  part  of  the  bishop, 
it  is  obvious  that  the  whole  subject  is  involved 
in  a  labyrinth  of  inconsistencies. 

4.  Practice  against  Theory.  On  page  72, 
(edition  of  1832,)  it  is  said,  "  No  person  shall  be 
admitted  to  the  Lord's  supper  among  us,  who  is 
guilty  of  any  practice  for  which  we  would  ex- 
clude a  member  of  our  church."  But  from  page 
41  we  learn  that  one  of  the  grounds  of  excluding 
members  of  the  Methodist  church,  is,  "  removing 
from  one  circuit  to  another  without  a  note  of 
recommendation  from  the  preacher."  But  the 
case  is  materially  altered  when  persons  are  en- 
ticed away  from  other  churches,  without  any 
certificate  or  note  of  recommendation.  They  are 
freely  and  with  open  arms  admitted,  and  that 
too  in  many  instances  where  they  would  be  de- 
nied, even  if  they  requested  a  note  of  recommen- 
j^»ation.     Indeed  the  usage  of  Methodism  in  this 


274  THE  DirncuLTiEs  of 

particulnr,  is  subversive  of  every  thing  like  order 
and  discipline  in  the  Christian  church.  Let  a 
member  of  any  other  denomination  suffer  the  just 
reward  of  his  deeds  and  be  cut  off,  he  at  once 
takes  refuge  by  the  altar  of  xMethodism  ;  he  is 
considered  lawful  prey  and  clear  gain  by  his 
new  associates;  and  is  readily  admitted  to  their 
confidence  and  fellowship.  Hence  a  total  pros- 
tration of  successful  discipline  in  tlie  liouse  of 
God. 

5.  Methodist  Liberality.  Rule  4,  p.  75:  "Let 
it  be  recommended  to  our  people  not  to  attend 
the  singing  schools,  which  are  not  under  our  di- 
rection." The  very  singing  schools  of  other 
sects,  it  seems,  are  contamination  to  good  Meth- 
odists. 

On  pp.  79,  SO,  we  find  the  following;  "It  is 
expected  of  all  who  continue  in  those  societies, 
that  they  should  evidence  their  desire  of  salva- 
tion." Very  well.  But  how  are  they  to  evi- 
dence their  desire  of  salvation  ?  Among  other 
things,  the  fourtli  paragraph  from  the  above,  reads 
as  follows;  "By  doing  good,  especially  to  them 
that  are  of  the  household  of  faith,  or  groaning  to 
be  so;  employing  them  preferably  to  others,  buy- 
ing one  of  another,  helping  each  other  in  busi- 
ness^^ — And  this,  be  it  remembered,  is  one  of 
those  "  general  rules"  which  on  the  next  page, 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  275 

are  said  ^^  to  he  all  taught  of  God,'"  even  in  his 
written  word;"  and  ^^  which  his  Spirit  wrUes 
on  truly  awakened  hearts.''^  "  If  there  be  any 
among  us,"  adds  the  Book  of  Discipline,  '^  who 
habitually  break  any  of  them,  we  will  admonish 
him  of  the  error  of  his  ways,  we  will  bear  with 
him  for  a  season.  But  if  then  he  repent  not,  he 
hath  no  more  place  among  us.  TVe  have  deliv- 
ered our  oum  souhr^  In  other  words,  if  any 
Methodist  shall  employ  ha'M  ually,  any  person 
not  "  of  the  household  of  faith,  or  groaning  to  be 
so,"  or  shall  habitually,  bicy  of  such  a  person, 
preferably  to  a  brother  Methodist;  if  he  repent 
not,  he  is  twrned  out — that  the  conscientious 
preachers  may  '^deliver  their  own  souhr^ 

We  have  two  rules  (pp.  77,  85,)  forbidding 
buying  and  selling  on  the  Sabbath  ;  but  no  pro- 
hibition of  amusements  on  that  day.  This  in- 
deed might  be  regarded  merely  as'  an  oversight, 
were  it  not  that  we  have  line  upon  line,  and  pre- 
cept upon  precept,  about  rings,  ear-rings,  neck- 
laces, lace,  ruffles,  &c.,  and  the  preachers  are  ex- 
pressly forbidden  to  admit  to  class  ''any  who 
wear  high  heads,  enormous  bonnets,  ruffles  or 
rings."  Momentous  topics  these,  touching  the 
•'  heights  and  distances"  of  ladies'  heads,  and 
the  altitude,  diameter,  longitude,  and  circumfer- 
ence of  bonnets  and  head-dresses  !     A  little  com- 


276  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

mon  sense,  however  will  dictate  that  pride  as  fre- 
quently dwells  beneath  a  plain  exterior,  as  in 
connection  with  gay  clothinc^;  yea,  that  often 
persons  are  proud  of  'heir  plainness  and  humili- 
ty: One  thing  at  least  is  certain — "  cleansing 
the  outside  of  the  cup  and  platter,"  was  not  the 
Saviour's  method  of  making  the  vessel  really 
clean. 

On  page  86,  the  members  of  the  "Band  So- 
cieties" are  required  to  "  attend  constantly  on  all 
the  ordinances  of  God;''  and  the  fourth  subdi- 
vision under  this  head,  is — "  lo  observe  as  days 
of  fasting  or  abstinence,  all  Fridays  in  the  year." 
To  fast  every  Friday  one  of  the  ordinances  of 
God  I  Their  good  old  grand  mother  of  Rome,  has 
an  "  ordinance"  requiring  all  genuine  sons  of  the 
church,  to  eat  no  meat  on  Friday;  but  where  to 
open  my  Bible  to  find  such  an  ordinance  is  an 
entire  mystery.  We  strongly  suspect  that  this 
is  one  of  the  things  that  ought  not  to  have  escap- 
ed the  "considerable  purgation"  spoken  of  by 
Dr.  Miller.  The  blessed  Redeemer  enjoined 
fasting,  but  specified  no  particular  time  for  the 
discharge  of  the  duty ;  but  Methodism  would  be 
wiser  and  specifies  one  day  in  each  week  !  And 
this,  too,  is  one  of  those  rules,  and  a  part  of  that 
discipline,  in  regard  to  which,  neglect  or  diso- 
bedience subjects  the  person  on  the  third  offence, 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  277 

to  excommunication,  p.  92.  No  doubt  it  would 
be  a  mortal  sin  to  partake  of  a  hearty  meal  three 
Fridays  in  succession  !  So  thinks  their  most 
prudent  and  teiider  relative  over  the  seas.  The 
same  wise  and  compassionate  matron  not  only 
^^  commands  to  abstain  from  wea^^,"  but  also 
forbids  to  marry  in  certain  cases,  Equally  in- 
fallible  is  the  regulation  of  the  Methodist  discip- 
line, which  forbids  the  preacher  to  marry,  until 
four  years  after  entering  upon  his  office,  on  pain 
of  having  no  provision  made  for  the  support  of 
the  partner  of  his  cares — "  this  provision,  ($100) 
shall  not  apply  to  the  wives  of  such  preachers."* 
p.  169. 

5.  Elect  Infants.  We  have  already  noticed 
the  prayer,  (p.  104)  that  "  the  child  now  to  be 
baptized  may  ever  remain  in  the  number  of  thy 
faithful  and  elect  children.''^  From  the  parallel 
phrase  in  the  Westminster  confession,  viz:  "  elect 
infants,"  Presbyterians  have  been  denounced  as 
teaching  *'  infant  reprobation,"  "  infant  damna- 
tion," and  *'  that  there  are  infants  in  the  prison 
of  despair,  not  a  span  long  !"  It  is  true  when- 
ever our  calumniators  have  been  challanged  to 

*Since  this  paragraph  was  written,  this  popish  feature, 
we  understand,  has  been  expunged  from  the  Discipline. 
The  preachers  are  no  longer  '•''forbidden  to  marry  "  until 
the  church  grants  tliem  permission. 


278  THE    DIFFICULTIKS    OF 

name  the  individual  or  individuals  who  had  ut- 
tered such  a  sentiment,  they  have  been  silenced, 
at  least  for  the  time.  Suppose  that  Presbyteri- 
ans were  to  serve  them  with  a  specimen  of  their 
own  logic,  and  procl-aim  to  the  world  that  as  they 
hold  and  speak  the  doctrine  of  "  elect  children," 
they  must  necessarily  believe  "  infant  damna- 
tion," (fee.  There  would  be  as  much  ground  for 
the  charge  in  one  case  as  in  the  other,  and  cer- 
tainly not  less  truth  in  it. 

7.  Reverently  obey  the  bishops.  ♦'  Will  you 
reverently  obey  your  chief  ministers,"  is  a  ques- 
tion put  at  the  ordination  of  elders,  and  another  of 
the  same  import  at  the  ordination  of  deacons. 
T'here  is  a  considerable  improvement  practised 
at  Rome.  There  they  kneel  and  reverently  kiss 
the  toe  of  his  holiness  !  See  this  identical  form 
of  expression  in  the  Bull  of  Pope  Innocent  VIII. 
for  exterminating  the  Waldenses — '-'•Reverently 
to  obey  the  apostolical  mandates,"  &;c.,  viz  :  the 
bloody  edicts  of  his  anti-christian  majesty  ! 

But  perhaps  the  most  curious  illustration  of  the 
reverence  and  obedience  exacted  of  the  lower  or- 
ders of  the  Methodist  ministry,  is  found  on  pages 
3G,  37.  In  answer  to  the  question — "  What  is 
the  duty  of  a  preacher?  "  we  have  twelve  specifi- 
cations, and  among  others,  ♦»  Be  diligent " — ^'Let 
your  motto   be  holiness  to   the  LorcV^ — "Be 


ARUilNUN   A^ETHOPXSAt.  2t9 

ashamed  of  nothing  but  sin  " — *«  Yoii  have  hd- 
thing  to  do  but  to  save  souls :  therefore  spend  and 
be  spent  in  this  work  "— "  Save  as  many  as  you 
can  " — *'  It  is  your  duty  to  employ  yout  time  in 
the  manner  in  which  we  direct;  in  preaching  and 
visiting  from  house  to  house ;  in  reading,  medi- 
tation and  prayer."  When  we  had  read  thus 
far,  we  almost  involuntarily  exclaimed — -Admira- 
ble !  What  could  be  more  scriptural  and  excel- 
lent! But  alas  !  alas  !  The  very  next  sentence 
was  a  dead  fly  in  the  ointment — "  A.BOVE  ALL, 
if  you  labor  with  us  in  the  Lord's  vineyard,  it  is 
needful  you  should  do  t/iat  part  of  the  work 
which  WE  advise,  at  those  times  and  places 
which  WE  judge  most  for  his  glory<'*  Move 
all!  Above  preaching,  and  visiting,  and  reading, 
and  meditation  and  prayer !  Move  spending 
and  being  spent  for  Christ,  and  holiness,  and  the 
salvation  of  souls  !  Above  all  these,  "  reverent- 
ly OBEY  your  chief  ministers."  Truly,  it 
would  seem  that  in  the  Methodist  catalogue  of 
ministerial  virtues,  TO  OBEY  is  the  highest  at- 
tainment  of  Christian  perfection — the  pearl  of 
great  price — the  summum  bonum — the  one  thing 
needful— not  only  *'better  than  sacrifice,"  but 
better  than  holiness  and  salvation  !  Rebellion  is 
as  the  sin  of  witchcraft,  and  stubbornness  is  as 
iniquity  and  idolatry  !     In  the  light  of  thes«  faeii 


280  THE    DIFFICULTIKjS    Of 

we  may  readily  credit  the  testimony  of  one,  who 
had  himself  heen  a  Methodist,  "  that  nearly  all  of 
the  inferior  clergy  are  kept  in  a  state  of  spiritual 
bondage,  so  that  on  many  occasions,  they  dare 
not  speak  or  act  as  the  Scriptures  prescribe  and 
their  consciences  dictate,  lest  ihey  should  offend 
the  men  in  power,  and  be  chastised  by  a  remove 
to  a  disadvantageous  circuit,  by  a  breaking  down 
in  worldly  business,  or  by  excommunication." 
An  excellent  school  doubtless,  in  which  the  refrac- 
tory may  * 'learn  obedience  by  the  things  they 
suffer." 

8.  Auricular  Confession.  A  Methodist  "band" 
we  are  told  (p.  83)  consists  of  "two,  three,  or 
four  believers,  who  have  confidence  in  each  oth- 
er." Only  it  is  particularly  observed  that  "in 
one  of  these  bands,  all  must  be  7nen,  or  all  wo- 
men;  and  all  married  or  all  unmarried."  The 
wisdom  of  this  precaution  will  appear  directly. 
The  fourth  article  on  which  the  members  of  the 
*♦  band  "  agree,  is  *'  to  speak  each  of  us  in  order, 
freely  and  plainly,  the  true  state  of  our  souls, 
with  the  faults  we^have  committed  in  tempers, 
words,  or  actions,  {\n  "  thought,  word  or  deed," 
Wesley  originally  wrote  it,)  and  the  temptations 
we  have  felt  since  our  last  meeting."  The  sixth 
article  is  "to  desire  some  person  among  us  to 
speak  his  own  state  first,  and  then  to  ask  the 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  281 

rest  in  order  as  many  and  as  searching  ques^ 
tions  as  may  be  concerning  their  state,  sinSy  and 
temptations.''^  They  manage  this  matter  a  little 
differently  at  Rome,  but  it  is  doubtful  whether 
they  have  a  better  conjessional  than  this.  But 
there  is  more  to  come  :  among  "/Ae  questions 
proposed  to  one  before  he  is  admitted^^  to  tha 
band,  we  find  (p.  84)  the  following :  ♦'  Is  it  your 
desire  and  design  to  be  on  this  and  all  other  oc- 
casions entirely  open,  so  as  to  speak  without  dis- 
guise and  without  reserve, ^^  Thus  the  article 
stands  in  the  Discipline ;  but  Wesley  wrote  tha 
Latter  part  originally  as  follows  :  "50  as  to  speak 
every  thing  that  is  in  your  heart  without  EX- 
CEPTION, without  disguise,  and  without  re- 
serve*^ !  Popery  herself  demands  no  more  tho- 
rough confession  than  this.  And  besides,  tha 
following  questions  are  required  to  be  asked  "af 
every  meeting,^^  viz  :  "  What  known  sins  have 
you  committed  since  our  last  meeting?  What 
particular  temptations  have  you  met  witht 
»'  Confession,  as  managed  by  the  Church  of 
Rome,"  to  use  the  language  of  another,  "  is  infi- 
nitely preferable  to  confession  as  conducted  under 
the  auspices  of  Mr.  Wesley,  lithe  priest  divul- 
ges what  is  made  known  to  him  under  the  char- 
acter of  confessor,  he  is  liable  by  law  to  suffer 


282  THE   DIFFICULTIES   OF 

death,  at  least  where  Popery  is  established.  But 
in  these  Band-Societies,  the  most  open  and  unre- 
Bcrvcd  confession  is  made  in  the  hearing  of  a  do- 
zen or  twenty  women  and  boys,  who  are  at  liber- 
ty to  expose  publicly  all  they  hear,  without  being 
obnoxious  to  any  penalty  at  all."  After  what  we 
have  seen,  it  is  not  surprising  that  Mr.  Wesley 
should  write  a  highly  commendatory  life  of  Mr. 
De  Renty,  (a  Roman  Catholic,)  nor  that  the  fol- 
lowiig  passages  should  proceed  from  his  pen : 
"  One  day  he  visited  a  person,  who  from  ground* 
less  suspicion  had  cruelly  used  his  wife.  Mr^ 
De  Renty  accosted  him  with  such  language,  that 
lie  toas  persuaded  at  length  to  go  to  confession!! 
which  he  had  not  done  in  twelve  years  before.'* 
(See  Toplady's  letter  to  Wesley.)  And  of  De 
Renty  himself,  he  says — "  He  made  his  confcs^ 
sion  (toa  priest)  almost  every  day  till  his  death"!! 
This  biography  of  a  thorough  papist,  "Wesley 
placed  in  his  *'  Christian  Library,"  and  recom- 
mended to  his  followers.  '•  He  had  great  respect 
(he  adds)  for  holy  persons,  especially  for  priests. 
Whenever  he  met  them,  he  sahited  them  with 
profound  humility:  and  in  his  travels,  he  would 
alight  off  his  horse  to  do  it."  "And  without 
fcply  or  disputing,  with  the  utmost  respect  and 
fubmission,  ho  exactly  follofved  the  qrdcr  of  his 


I 


ARMINIAN    MBTHODISM.  283 

director,"  (or  confessor.)  The  reader  will  re- 
collect— ''Reverently  obey  your  chief  minis- 
ters'''! 

9.  Compensation  and  support  of  the  Preach- 
ers.— It  is  the  deliberate  conviction  of  our  mind, 
after  a  pretty  careful  examination,  that  in  rela- 
tion to  this  matter,  the  preachers  of  Methodism 
are  dealt  with  more  generously  (or  rather  have 
provided  for  themselves  more  liberally)  than  the 
ministers  of  any  other  branch  of  the  American 
church.  In  this  they  have  only  practised  upon 
the  principle  avowed  by  the  founder  of  their  syi- 
teni.  "1  know,"  says  Wesley,  (Works,  vol.  1, 
p.  78,)  "the  spiritual  laborer  is  worthy  of  his  re- 
ward ;  and  that  if  we  sow  to  our  flock  spiritual 
things,  it  is  meet  that  we  reap  of  their  c-arnal 
things  :  I  do  not  therefore  blame,  no,  not  in  any 
degree^  a  minis fer's  taking  a  yearly  salary.'^ 
It  is  true  the  impression  is  often  made  that  whilst 
the  ministers  of  other  denominations  are  abun- 
dantly paid  for  their  labors,  the  Methodist  preach- 
ers not  only  receive  no  pecuniary  compensation, 
but  indignantly  spurn  the  thought,  as  degrading 
them  down  to  a  level  with  hireling  priests.  Whe- 
ther this  impression  is  intentionally  left  upon  the 
minds  of  the  people,  we  know  not ;  we  only  state 
the  fact.     It  should  be  kept  in  mind,  moreover, 

that  when  we  speak  of  the  compensation  of  Me- 

34* 


^4  THE    DirnCULTIEi    Of 

thodist  preachers,  we  mean  the  travelling  prea- 
chers and  circuit  riders:  the  local  preacher  re- 
ceives no  pay  by  the  rules  of  the  Discipline,  ex- 
cept when  he  "  fills  the  place  of  the  travelling 
preacher.'* 

Let  us  now  examine  what  provision  is  made 
in  the  Book  of  Discipline  for  remunerating  the 
travelling  ministry  for  their  toils,  always  bearing 
in  mind,  that  be  it  scant  or  liberal,  it  is  precisely 
what  these  preachers  have  legislated  into  their 
own  pockets  ;  and  that  at  their  pleasure  it  may 
be  increased  to  any  practicable  extent,  without 
consulting  the  people  who  pay  it. 

I.  "  The  annual  allowance  of  the  travelling 
preachers  shall  be  one  hundred  dollars,  and  their 
travelling  expenses. 

II.  The  annual  allowance  of  the  tvives  of  tra- 
velling preachers,  shall  be  one  hundred  dollars. 

III.  Each  child  of  a  travelling  preacher  shall 
be  allowed  sixteen  dollars  annually  to  the  age  of 
seven  years  ;  and  twenty-four  dollars  annually 
from  seven  to  fourteen.  And  those  preachers 
whose  wives  are  dead,  shall  be  allowed  for  each 
child  a  sum  sufficient  to  pay  the  board  of  such 
child  or  children  for  the  above  term  of  years. 
Nevertheless,  this  rule  shall  not  apply  to  the  chil- 
dren of  preachers  whose  families  are  provided 
(•r  by  other  njiJana,  in  their  circuits  respectively. 


ARMINIAN    METFTODISM.  285 

IV.  The  allowance  of  superannuated,  worn 
out,  and  supernumerary  preachers,  shall  be  one 
hundred  dollars  annually. 

V.  The  annual  allowance  of  their  wives  shall 
be  one  hundred  dollars. 

VI.  The  annual  allowance  of  their  widows 
shall  be  one  hundred  dollars. 

VII.  Their  orphans  shall  be  allowed  the  same 
sums  respectively  which  are  allowed  to  the  chil- 
dren of  living  preachers.  And  on  the  death  of  a 
preacher,  leaving  a  child  or  children  without  so 
much  of  worldly  goods  as  should  be  necessary 
to  his,  or  her,  or  their  support,  the  annual  confe- 
rence shall  raise  a  yearly  sum  for  the  subsistence 
and  education  of  such  orphan  child  or  children, 
until  he,  she,  or  they  shall  be  fourteen  years  of 
age."  (These  eeven  items  are  extracts  from  the 
Discipline,  pp.  1G9,  170.  Edition  1832.) 

Again  :  "  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  said  committee 
or  one  appointed  for  that  purpose,  to  make  an  es- 
timate of  the  amount  necessary  io  furnish  fuel 
and  table  expenses  for  the  family  or  families  of 
preachers  stationed  with  them,  and  the  stewards 
shall  provide  by  such  means  as  they  may  devise, 
to  meet  such  expenses,  in  money  or  otherwise.'' 
Discip.  p.  178. 

Again;  p.  178:  "It  is  recommended  by  the 
general  conference  to  the  travelling  preachers,  to 


286  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

advise  our  friends  in  general,  to  purchase  a  lot 
of  ground  in  each  circuit,  and  to  build  a  preach- 
er^ 8  house  thereon,  and  to  furnish  it  with  at  least 
the  heavy  furniture."  ♦'  The  general  conference 
recommend  to  all  the  circuits,  (if  not  able  to  build 
a  preacher's  house,)  to  rent  a  house  for  the  mar- 
ried preacher  and  his  family,  and  that  the  annual 
conferences  do  assist  to  make  up  the  rents  of  such 
liouses  as  far  as  they  can,  when  ihe  circuits  can- 
not do  it."  pp.  170,  177. 

Thus  far  the  Discipline.  Now  let  us  sura  up. 
We  will  take  an  average  case,  gay  a  preacher 
with  a  wife  and  fire  children,  two  above  and  three 
under  seven  years  of  age.  The  account  will 
stand  as  follows  : 

Annual  allowance  to  the  preaclier,  §100  00 

Do.  do.        to  the  prcaciier's  wife,  100  00 

Two  children  above  seven,  .5.94  each,  48  00 

Three  children  under  seven,  ^j  6  each,  48  00 

Tabic  ex[)ensGs,  or  boarding-,  at  75  cents  each  per 

week,  for  six  persons,  omitting  the  youngest 

child,  and  onuttingf  domestics,  234  00 

House  rent,  45  CO 

Travelling  expensos  to  conference,  &c.,  25  00 


eCOO  00 


This  allowance  oi  six  hundred  dollars  is  great- 
ly increased,  if  the  preacher's    family  numbers 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  287 

eight  or  ten*  And  should  he  become  disabled  by 
accident  or  infirmity,  the  allowance  is  continued 
to  him  and  his  children,  even  though  he  should 
be  laid  aside  in  the  early  part  of  his  ministry ; 
so  that  for  a  few  years,  or  weeks,  or  days  service, 
he  and  his  family  may  receive  their  allowance 
for  half  a  century.  And  when  he  goes  to  rest 
from  his  labors,  he  has  the  consolation  of  know- 
ing that  his  widow  and  children  will  not  be  cast  up* 
on  the  cold  charity  of  an  unfeeling  world,  but  will 
be  provided  with  a  very  respectable  annual  allow- 
ance. Well  may  we  inquire  with  Dr.  Schmuck- 
er,  "  What  denomination  of  Christians  is  there  in 
our  land,  whose  ministers  would  not  gladly  ac' 
cept  this  provision  ? 

Nothing  but  the  necessity  of  defendiag  our- 
selves agaiast  the  ungenerous  assaults  of  our  ad- 
versaries, would  constrain  us  to  enter  into  these 
minute  calculations.  Since  however  they  have 
provoked  the  discussion,  we  esteem  it  to  be  our 
duty  to  let  the  Christian  public  know  the  whole 
truth.  It  should  be  remembered  therefore  that 
the  foregoing  estimates  are  made  for  a  region  of 
country  where  the  ordinary  salaries  of  the  minis- 
ters of  other  denominations  rate  fiiom  S400  to 
$500 — rarely  above  the  latter  sum,  except  in  a 
few  instances  in  large  and  expensive  villages,  and 
their  vicinity  :    and  often  less  thai   the  former 


288  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

amount — $400.  With  what  shadow  of  truth  or 
justice,  then,  are  these  men  denounced  by  the 
*'  preachere,"  whose  allowance  by  their  own  dis- 
cipline, is  considerably  larger  ?  This  their  most 
zealous  jidvocates  are  compelled  to  admit.  The 
Discipline  moreover  is  the  handy  work  of  the 
preachers  exclusively.  This  sum,  therefore, 
($500,)  is  the  annual  compensation  which  /Act/ 
have  ordained  to  be  due  for  their  ministerial  ser- 
vices. This  is  the  sum  they  will  receive,  if  they 
can  get  it,  and  which  they  have  passed  the  requi- 
site laws  to  secure,  provided  the  people  will  sub- 
mit to  be  taxed  to  this  amount.  What  then  be- 
comes of  their  voluntary  poverty  ?  Ought  they 
not  to  blush  for  the  outcry  which  they  have  raised 
respecting  the  large  salaries  of  the  clergy  of  oth- 
er branches  of  the  church  ?  Is  it  fair,  is  it  honest, 
to  indulge  in  harsh  reflections  and  taunting  insin- 
uations against  ministers  who  do  not  receive,  in 
numberless  instances,  so  large  a  salary  as  Metho- 
dist preachers  have  decreed  to  be  not  too  large  a 
sum  for  a  clergyman  with  a  certain  family  ? 

In  confirmation  of  the  above  estimate,  the  Rev. 
R.  S.  Storrs  in  a  letter  to  the  editor  of  the  »*Home 
Missionary,"  speaking  of  Lower  Canada,  writes 
as  follows  :  "  The  salary  of  the  Methodist  minis- 
ters is  fixed  at  one  hundred  guineas  per  annum, 
\eith  a  furnished  dwelling  house;  and  thirty  gui- 


ARMINIAN    METHODIiSM.  289 

neas  are  added  when  there  are  three  children ; 
and  ten  guineas  more  on  the  addition  of  each 
child  to  the  family."  So  that  a  preacher  with 
four  children,  would  receive  one  hundred  and  for- 
ty guineas,  which,  with  a  furnished  dwelling 
house,  would  be  worth  between  seven  and  eight 
hundred  dollars.  And  yet  Mr.  Storrs  says,  "the  ex- 
pense of  living  in  Canada  is  comparatively  small." 
We  are  not  sufficiently  in  possession  of  the 
facts  to  form  a  detailed  estimate  for  our  largest 
sized  towns  and  cities.  The  following  statements 
however  will  afford  a  clue  to  explain  how  these 
matters  are  managed  there.  In  the  trial  of  an  ac- 
tion for  libel  in  New  York,  brought  by  Azor 
Hoyt  against  Rev.  Messrs.  Waugh,  Emory, 
Bangs,  and  J.  CoUard,  Rev.  Mr.  Durbin  (now 
President  of  Dickinson  College)  testified  as  fol- 
lows :  "  My  salary  is  twelve  hundred  and  fifty 
dollars  annually;  that  of  Mr.  Bangs,  I  think, 
fifteen  hundred  or  upwards — that  of  Mr.  Merritt, 
about  twelve  Httyidred — that  of  Mr.  Waugh,  six- 
teen hundred — that  of  Mr.  Mason  is,  I  think, 
ovOT  one  thousand  and  under  fifteen  hundred 
dollars.''^  Now  whether  it  is  understood  that 
besides  this  monied  compensation,  theae  gentle- 
men receive  a  furnished  house,  rent  free,  table  ex- 
penses, <fcc.,  according  to  the  discipline,  we  are 
not  informed.  If  so,  the  foregoing  sums  would  be 


290  tHE    DIFFICULTIES    5F 

swelled  to  a  very  handsome  remuneralioft  for 
their  toils. 

We  have  also  received  from  a  clerical  friertd 
and  brother,  in  Baltimore,  the  following  state- 
iftent :  ♦'  In  regard  to  this  city,  I  have  no  doubt 
you  might  safely  estimate  ♦table  expenses,*  <S'c-.-, 
at  from  seven  to  eight  hundred  dollars,  and  the 
average  of  their  house  rent  at  three  hundred.^'' 
Indeed  one  preacher's  family  was  understood  to 
have  cost  the  society  in  Baltimore  upwards  oUivo 
thousand  dollars  per  annum  I 

But  to  return  to  our  estimate  for  the  country. 
If  the  preachers,  as  we  liave  shown,  have  or- 
dained six  hundred  dollars  as  their  annual  sala- 
ry, it  is  justly  due^  or  it  is  not.  If  not  justly 
due,  then  it  is  "the  wages  of  unrighteousness:" 
but  if  it  be  justly  due  to  the  preacher,  why  are 
Presbyterian  ministers  denounced  fof  receiving 
generally  a  much  smaller  sum,  particularly  as  it 
is  always  the  voluntary  offering  of  the  people  to 
the  man  of  their  choice,  not  a  preacher  sent  by 
the  bishop  and  saddled  on  the  congregation  whe- 
ther they  will  or  not  ? 

But  it  has  been  retorted  with  much  warmth, 
*'  The  preachers  do  not  get  the  sums  allowed  by 
the  Discipline."  Very  probably  in  many  cases 
it  is  so.  We  should  think  it  strange  if  it  were 
otherwise.     There  is  some  reason  however  to 


ARAfiNiAN  Methodism.  291 

believe,  as  will  be  shown  presently,  that  the  pay- 
ment of  the  allowance  is  the  ordinary  practice, 
its  non-payment  the  exception.  But  admitting 
that  the  preachers  *'  do  not  get"  what  their  rules 
allow,  it  must  be  because  the  people  will  not 
submit  to  be  taxed  to  the  full  amount  agreed 
upon  by  their  spiritual  rulers.  We  have  already 
cited  the  rule  on  page  90  of  the  Discipline,  de- 
claring, "  the  offender  must  be  cut  off"  on  the 
third  instance  of  ^*  neglect  of  duties  of  any  kind,''* 
or  "disobedience  to  the  order  and  discipline  of 
the  church;"  that  is,  *'  if  there  be  no  sign  of  hu- 
miliation.'''' Of  course  it  follows,  that  if  this  rule 
were  put  in  force,  every  third  instance  of  "  ne- 
glect" to  pay  the  preacher  would  be  followed  by 
excommunication,  if  there  were  no  signs  of  re- 
pentance !  And  on  page  36  we  read — "  Remem- 
ber a  Methodist  preacher  is  to  mind  every  point 
great  and  small  in  the  Methodist  Discipline." 
If  the  preacher's  salary  is  not  paid,  what  does  it 
prove  ?  Why  only  that  they  have  gone  a  little 
too  fast  and  too  far  in  passing  the  laws  which 
impose  the  tax  upon  the  people,  or  in  common 
phrase  "have  reckoned  without  their  host." 
The  people  will  not  submit  to  their  rules,  and  the 
preachers  dare  not  enforce  them;  and  there  they 
stand  recorded  evidence  against  their  authors  of 
their  disposition  to  take  much  more  than  they 
25 


292  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

cai  get,  without  risking'Hhe  loss  of  many  of  their 
members.  Tlie  tax  laws  are  there,  a  terror  to 
evil  doers  who  might  neglect  to  pay  the  preacli- 
er,  and  no  doubt  thousands  are  thereby  collected 
from  the  weak  and  credulous  who  would  rather 
give  their  money  than  cause  strife,  or  run  the 
hazard  of  being  excluded  from  the  church. 

But  what  is  the  testimony  of  facts  respecting 
the  payment  of  the  preachers'  salaries  ?  ^\ejirst 
quote  the  direction  on  page  171 — "Let  there  be 
made  tveekly  class  collections  in  all  our  Sccieties 
where  it  is  practicable."  On  the  next  page 
*'  every  preacher"  having  charge  of  a  circuit  is 
required  to  "make  a  yearly  collection,  and  if  ex- 
pedient a  quarterly  one,  in  every  congregation 
where  there  is  a  probability  the  people  will  be 
willing  to  contributed  And  on  same  page  it  is 
admitted  there  is  sometimes  "a  surplus  in  the 
hands  of  the  stewards,  after  paying  the  allowan- 
ces of  the  preachers  in  the  circuit."  Secondly, 
we  adduce  the  following  testimony  extracted 
from  the  Religious  Intelligencer  of  New  Haven, 
(for  1823,  p.  79.3.)  "  I  was  brought  up  a  Metho- 
dist," remarks  this  witness,  "and  my  parents  are 
to  this  hour  members  of  that  Society.  I  have 
been  a  preacher  in  that  denomination  a  number 
of  years.  In  the  year  —  I  thought  it  my  duty  to 
request  a  dismission  from  that  body:  and  as  there 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  293 

was  nothing  against  my  religious  and  moral  char- 
acter, I  was  accordingly  dismissed,  and  united  my- 
self to  a  respectable  association  of  Congregational 
ministers  in  New  England.  Soon  after  this  I 
had  a  call  to  settle  with  the  congregation  of  which 
I  am  now  pastor.  From  this  statement,  you  will 
easily  conclude  that  I  must  be  well  acquainted 
with  the  doctrine  and  discipline  of  the  metho- 
dists.  It  is  with  the  utmost  satisfaction  I  bear 
witness,  as  respects  the  salaries  of  Methodist 
preachers.  To  the  honor  of  the  Methodists  I 
can  say  [  always  received  my  salary  with  great 
punctuality."  (Here  he  makes  some  calculations, 
which  are  precisely  like  those  given  above,  ex- 
cept that  he  actually  retoived  four  dollars  per 
week  boarding  for  himself  and  wife,  whilst  we 
have  stated  it  at  seventy-hve  cents  each  in  the 
foregoing  calculation.)  "As  respects  their  ftot 
getting  what  the  Discipline  allows,"  adds  this 
writer,  it  may  be  true  in  some  few  cases;  but 
without  any  reflection  upon  the  Methodist  preach- 
ers as  a  body,  most  of  these  men  are  of  that  class 
who  would  get  far  less  in  almost  any  other  situ- 
ation. I  have  made  the  proposal  several  times 
to  my  society,  to  place  my  salary  on  the  plan  of 
the  Mcth  )dist  discipline."  (Here  he  compares 
his^  salary  with  what  it  would  be  in  the^Metho- 
dist  church,  and  finds  that  for  his  family  oi  seven 


294  THE    DifFICULTIES    OF 

persons,  his  salary  would  be  raised  iictniy-eight 
dollars  and  the  house  rent.)     "  That  the  respec- 
table Methodist  preachers  do  get  their  salaries, 
(he  continues,)  we  cannot  doubt.     I  can  at  any 
lime  bring   forward   cases   in  which  Methodist 
preachers  have  received  the  notes  of  the  circuit 
stewards  on  interest  for  the  balance  of  their  sala- 
ry for  the  year,  when  it  has  not  been  promptly 
paid."     Such  then  is  the   unvarnished  tale  of  a 
"prophet  of  their  own,"  satisfactorily  proving 
that  the  statutes,  by  which  the  preachers   have 
effectually  repelled  the  charge  of  "  denying  the 
faith,  because  they  make  not  provision  for  their 
own,"  are  not  a  "  dead  letter,"  but  a  living  prin- 
ciple, securing  in  the  majority  of  cases  (if  this 
witness    speak  the  truth,)    ample  provision  for 
themselves  and  "  those  of  their  own  household." 
The  monied  allowance  {ox  themselves  and  wives, 
(independently  of  house  rent,  table  expenses  and 
other  items,)  has  several  times  been  enlarged, 
but  never  reduced.     A  principal  member  of  the 
church  stated  to  Dr.  Schmucker,   that  it  was  at 
first   sixty-four    dollars  each,    then  eighty    dol- 
lars, and  now  one  hundred  dollars.     And  even 
the    collection  of  then-   liberal  saliirics,  as    Dr. 
Schmucker  observes,  is  not   attended   with  the 
same  trouble  as  in  other  churches,  among  other 
reasons,  bccauoe  a  larore  income  is  annually  de- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  395 

rived  from  general  funds.  "  The  chartered fund'^ 
was  established  in  1796,  at  which  time  the  pre- 
viously existing  "  stock  of  the  preachers''  fimd^^' 
together  with  the  profits  of  the  book  concern, 
were  thrown  into  this  fund/  and  the  interest  of 
the  whole  applied  to  the  preachers' \srdaries. 
That  this  stock  was  profitable  more  than  forty 
years  ago,  is  seen  from  the  following  extract 
from  the  Discipline  of  1797,  (9th  edition.) 

"Qaestion.   What  sum  of  money  shall  be  al- 
lowed distressed  preachers  out  of  the  bock  fund  ? 

Answer,  'c'66.}  dollars  annually. 

Subsequently  the  profits  of  the  book  concern 
were  no  longer  thrown  into  the  chartered  fund  on 
interest,  but  were  wholly  '^applied  from  year  to 
year  in  making  up  the  preachers'  salaries.  "  The 
chartered  fund  alone  amounted  in  January,  1S2D, 
to  twenfy-seven  thousand  dollars  !  The  annual 
profits  of  the  book  concern,  we  believe,  are  nev- 
er published  to  the  churclies,  but  must  from  tJie 
nature  of  tb.e  case  be  very  great.  They  have 
several  religious  periodicals,  one  of  which,  (a 
weekly  paper.)  boasts  thirly  thousand  subscri- 
bers. Each  of  these  pays  two  dollars  per  year, 
which  on  so  large  an  edition,  must  yield  not  less 
than  thirty  thousand  dollars  annually.  Besides, 
every  preacher  is  oiiicially  a  book  agent,  «'  who 
is  to  see  that  his  circuit  be  duly  supplied  with 
25* 


t96  THJS    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

books,  and  to  take  ciinrge  of  all  books  sent  him." 
(Discip.  p.  166.  Eiiiiit/n  b25.)  Thus  they  car- 
ry on  an  immense  book  trade  over  the  wide  ex- 
tent of  our  country,  the  profits  of  which  they  ap- 
ply to  their  own  salary  and  the  support  of  their 
widows  and  orphans.  With  near  tivo  thousand 
preachers,  agents  in  this  business,  and  '•  six  or 
eight  hioidred  thousand''^  members,  who  are 
cautioned  "  jiot  to  purchase  any  books  which  tve 
publish^  of  any  other  persons,  than  the  aforesaid 
D.  hilt  and  T.  Ware,  and  the  Methodist  minis- 
ters, or  such  persons  as  sell  thevi  by  their  con- 
sent,''^  (Portrait  of  Methodism,)  the  annual  pro- 
fits must  be  enormous  in  a  concern  of  such  un- 
paralelled  extent.*  And  all  the  proceeds  are  ap- 
j-ropriated  by  statute,  after  retaining  the  necessa-? 
ry  capital  to  carry  on  the  business,  to  no  other 
purpose  than  the  payment  of  the  preacher^s  al- 
lowance. In  what  other  denomination  is  there  a 
security  like  this  for  ample  compensation  to  their 
ministers  for  their  self-denying  toils  ?  And  in 
the  light  of  these  facts,  how  must  we  regard  the 
outcry  of  Methodists  against  the  clergy  of  other 
sects  in  regard  to  salary,  when  in  fact  no  branch 
of  the  church  on  earth  has  a  ministry  placed  on 
such  high  and  independent  footing  in  this  respect 
as  their  own.     INot  only  do  they  require  their 

*  See  Dr.  Schmucker's  letters  to  R«v.  Mr.  Young. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  297 

membei-R,  even  in  straitened  circumstances,  ta 
contribute  liberally,  (it  is  well  known  that  house 
maids  p\ij  four  dollars  a  year,)  but  by  a  migh- 
ty machinery,  reaching  its  hundred  hands  to  eve- 
ry nook  and  corner  of  the  land,  they  manage  an. 
unexampled  triifiic,  which  pours  into  their  treas- 
ury its  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands  annually. 
But  perhaps  the  worst  feature  of  the  system  is 
the  secret  agency  by  which  the  people  who  pay 
this  money  are  excluded  from  all  part  or  lot  in. 
its  distribution.  Preachers  pass  the  revenue 
laws — preachers  collect  the  tax — preachers  meet 
in  secret  conclave  and  divide  the  spoil;  in  other 
words,  fix  the  amount  of  their  own  salary,  and 
allow  themselves  the  sums  they  in  their  wisdom 
may  consider  lawfully  due  for  their  important 
services — but  no  eye  or  hand  of  a  layman  must 
presume  to  interfere  in  these  transactions  !  In 
proof  of  these  statements  we  refer  to  the  Disci- 
pline, (pp.  167 — 172.)  The  conference,  com- 
posed exclusively  of  preachers,  fix  the  amount  of 
salary,  and  the  preacliers  take  up  the  collections, 
which  are  ordered  "  to  be  brought  or  sent  to  the 
annual  conference''''  (p.  172)  to  be  disposed  of 
exclusively  by  preachers  !  It  is  true  the  mo- 
neys are  in  the  first  instance  "  to  be  lodged  with 
the  stewardsj^^  who  are  laymen,  and  this  is  an 
apparent  exception  to  the  above  remarks ;    but 


298  THK    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

on  examination  it  will  be  found  to  be  only  appa- 
renU  ""^  i'Q'd\.  Who  noiniiialc  the  stewanls  ? 
The  preachers  exclusively.  Who  elect  them? 
The  quarterly  conferonce.  Who  compose  this 
oonference  ?  Preachers,  who  are  self-appointed; 
"  cxhorters,''''  appointed  exclusively  by  the  prea,- 
chers;  "  leaders,''''  also  appointed  only  by  the 
preachers;  and  "  sfeicard><,^'  nominaled  by  llie 
preachers.  This  is  the  body  wliich  elects  the 
sicward,  after  he  is  nominated  by  the  preacher  ! 
'JMus  is  one  feature  of  Dr.  Hangs'  '•  clcciive  sys- 
tem ".'  We  respectfully  sui)mit  that  it  would  be 
quite  as  republican  and  fair,  and  certainly  much 
more  open  and  candid,  for  the  preaclicr  to  take 
the  appointment  of  the  steward  directly  into  hi.s 
own  hands,  or  himself  perform  the  duties  o{  trea- 
si'rer  of  the  circuit.  'I'liese  stewards,  be  it  also 
rGmembercd,  are  bound  to  pay  the  preachers  just 
the  sums  they  have  awarded  to  thinisclves  for 
quarterage,  and  the  surplus,  if  any,  goes  into 
the  hands  of  the  preachers  in  conference  assem- 
bled ;  and  one  of  the  "  duties  "  of  tlie  steward, 
(on  the  third  ♦•  neglect"  of  whicli  he  may  be  ex- 
communicated.) is  "  to  be  subject  to  the  biishops, 
the  presiding  elder,  and  the  elder,  deacon,  and 
travelling  preachers  of  the  circuit,''  (p.  169.)  So 
that  he  is  not  only  the  creature  of  their  will,  but 
the  mere  tool  of  their  pleasure. 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  299 

But  it  is  replied  with  great  indignation,  "that 
not  a  cent  can  be  had  for  tabic  expenses  and 
house  rent  v/ithoiit  the  consent  and  authority  of 
a  lay  committee."  But  not  to  insist  upon  the 
f^ict  that  the  conference  (of  preachers)  can  dis- 
pense with  this  committee  whenever  it  pleases 
them — we  inqwire,  Who  are  the  members  of  this 
lay  committee  ?  The  stewards  !  It  is  '^  a  com- 
mittee of  stewards  ;"  and,  as  we  have  just  shown, 
might  with  about  the  same  propriety  be  "  a  com- 
mittee of  preachers  "  ! 

Again  it  is  argued  that  the  preacher's  salary 
cannot  be  rated  at  six  hundred  dollars,  because 
♦'  It  is  impossible  to  tell  hov/  much  such  a  com- 
mittee, in  any  given  case,  will  allow  for  hors3  rent 
and  table  expenses,"  and  it  is  even  suggested 
that  they  may  refuse  to  ailov/  any  thing.  But 
what  saith  the  Discipline?  ''It  shall  be  THE 
DUTY  of  said  committee  to  make  an  estimate  of 
the  amount  necessary  to  furnish  fuel  and  table 
expenses  " — '•  And  the  stev/ards  shall  provide 
by  such  means  as  they  may  devise,  to  meet  such 
expenses  in  money  or  otherv/ise."  p.  ITS.  But 
the  rule  p.  90,  before  referred  to,  expressly  de- 
clares that  "  in  cases  of  i.cglccl  cf  DUTIES  of 
any  kind,^^  or  "  disobedience  to  the  order  and 
discipline  of  the  church,^'  the  guilty  person  is  on 
the  third  oj^cncs,  to  be  "  cut  cf/Y'  v/hether  he  be 


300  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

Steward,  member  of  committee,  or  ^v])at  not. 
They  are  bound  on  pain  of  excommunication,  to 
make  an  estimate  of  "  the  amount  necessary,'''' 
not  any  amount  they  may  please  to  allow  the 
preacher,  but  that  precise  ainnunt  which,  accor- 
ding to  ordinary  rates  of  expenditure,  is  "  jieces- 
sary  "  for  fuel  and  table  expenses,  and  '■'■  provide 
to  meet  such  expenses  in  money  or  otherwise." 
In  view  of  such  facts,  it  is  folly  to  talk  of  this 
committee  having  power  to  allow  sixty  cents  in- 
stead of  six  hundred  dollars  !  !  *  And  to  make 
assurance  doubly  sure,  it  is  declared  to  be  "  the 
duty  of  the  presiding  elders  and  preichers  to 
use  their  influence  to  carry  the  rules  respecting 
building  and  renting  houses  for  the  preachers  in- 
to etTect."  "  And  it  is  recommended  to  the  an- 
nual conference  to  make  a  special  inquiry  of 
their  members  respecting  this  part  of  their  duty.'" 
p.  177.  The  preachers  are  *' to  use  their  influ- 
ence" !  What  kind  or  degree  of  influence  the 
preachers  and  the  conference  are  empowered  to 
exert  over  the  stewads,  when  it  is  known  that 
if  they  "neglect  their  duty"  in  making- up  ihe 
preachers'  ?alaiies,  and  securing  them  (onforta- 
ble  and  well-furnished  houses,  on  the  t  drd  of- 
fence "they  must  be  cit  off','''  except  they  repent 

*  See  Mr.  Cook's  "  Refutation,"  and  "  Rejoinder," 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM. 


301 


and  mend  their  ways,  it  is  not  difficult  to  under- 
stand !  ! 

On  the  whole  it  is  obvious  that  our  Methodist 
friends  of  the  clerical  order,  possess  very  consid- 
erable Jinancial  skill.  This  we  think  has  been 
fully  proved  in  the  previous  discussion,  and  may 
be  made  still  more  plain  by  one  or  two  additional 
facts.  "  It  is  contrary  to  the  Methodist  economy 
to  build  houses  with  pews  to  sell  or  rent."  (Dis- 
cip.  p.  159.)  But,  as  has  been  well  remarked  by 
my  correspondent  in  Baltimore,  "  more  money  is 
a^n  lally  paid  by  many  families  in  their  weekly  tax 
ii  cliss  meeting,  than  they  would  be  required  to 
pay  for  a  pew  in  one  of  our  churches.  Multitudes 
are  deceived  by  the  smallness  of  the  periodical 
sum,  and  have  no  idea  of  the  amount  in  the  course 
of  the  year."  *  Besides,  there  is  another  very 
important  reason  why  they  are  opposed  to  the 
pew  system.  If  the  people  owned  the  pews,  they 
could  control  the  house,  which  would  be  an  utter 

*  The  following  facts  came  within  my  own  knowledg-e. 
A  person  who  had  been  in  the  habit  of  worshipping  with 
Presbyterians,  united  with  the  Methodists,  together  with 
his  family.  He  very  candidly  acknowledged  that  where- 
as tie  used  to  pay  six  or  seven  dollars  annual  pew  rent,  he 
was  taxed  by  the  Methodist  preachers  at  the  rate  of  a  dol- 
lar  per  head,  per  quarter,  for  himself  and  family;  amoun- 
ting  during  the  year  to  upw^ards  o^  twenty  dollars.  And 
he  very  honestly  declared,  the  "  preachers"  should  hold 
their  peace  on  that  topic. 


302  THE    DIFFICULTIES    OF 

abomination  in  the  eyes  of  the  preachers  !  The 
conference  would  no  longer  have  the  power  to 
use  the  property  for  their  own  purposes,  contrary 
to  the  unanimous  wish  of  the  contributors  and 
real  owners.  Therefore  j^etf^s  would  be  a  dange- 
rous innovation  ! 

In  connection  with  these  statements,  let  the 
reader  recur  to  the  evidence  adduced  in  a  forego- 
ing letter,  that  the  ownership  of  every  Methodist 
church  and  parsonage  is  vested  in  the  conference. 
The  authorized  deed  makes  no  mention  of  the 
particular  congreg'alion  as  a  party  in  the  transac- 
tion, but  only  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church 
in  the  United  States  ;  and  the  principle  has  been 
actually  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  Penn- 
sylvania, in  the  case  of  an  appeal,  by  a  minority 
of  trustees  or  agents  of  the  conference,  from  the 
verdict  of  a  jury  previously  given  in  favor  of  the 
majority  both  of  the  congregation  and  of  the  trus- 
tees, who  had  joined  the  Protestant  Methodists 
or  Radicals.  The  Supreme  Court  therefore  has 
settled  the  principle  that  a  minority,  however 
smalU  of  the  faithful  servants  of  the  conference, 
may,  on  the  ground  of  the  only  authorized  form  of 
deed,  dispossess  a  majority,  however  large,  of 
their  property  in  a  church  or  parsonage.  Submis- 
sion to  the  sovereign  authority  of  a  conference  of 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  303 

preachers  is  the  only  legal  title  to  funds  thus  ves- 
ted. *'It  is  therefore  undeniable  that  if  every 
member  and  every  trustee  of  a  church  thus  deed- 
ed, were  to  regard  any  future  measures  of  the 
conference  as  tyrannical,  and  should  desire  to  . 
M'^ithdraw  and  introduce  other  preachers,  the  con- 
ference could  turn  the  key  on  them,  and  they 
would  be  compelled  to  submit."  In  proportion, 
therefore,  as  the  members  of  the  church  secede, 
and  vacate  the  houses  and  lands  which  they  have 
occupied,  will  an  immense  and  accumulating  re- 
venue of  this  sort,  be  placed  in  the  hands  of  the 
preachers  composing  the  conference.  The  Pro- 
testant Methodists  may  get  the  men,  but  the 
Episcopal  Methodists  hold  fast  the  money.  If 
the  apathy  or  fond  credulity  of  a  portion  of  the 
American  people  shall  permit  this  system  to  pur- 
sue its  course  as  in  former  years,  half  a  century 
will  develope  results  which  will  impart  to  state- 
ments of  this  sort  the  character  of  history,  rather 
than  that  of  prediction. 

In  conclusion :  If  such  be  the  poverty  of  the 
ministry  of  Methodism,  I  presume  there  are  but 
few  who,  in  relation  to  themselves,  would  refuse 
to  write  upon  it,  "  perpetua  esto."  Six  or  se- 
ven hundred  dollars  secured  in  compensation  of 
labors,  for  the  right  performance  of  which  there 
has  not  been  any  preparatory  expenditure  worthy 
26 


304  THE    DIFFICtLTlEi    Of 

of  notice,  is  no  mean  provision  for  the  good  things 
of  this  life.  In  most  other  denominations,  the 
intended  minister  is  required  to  pass  through  a 
course  of  training,  from  seven  to  twelve  years  in 
duration,  in  which  he  must  expend  a  small  es- 
tate before  he  can  enter  upon  the  duties  of  his 
profession  ;  and  if,  in  the  providence  of  God,  he 
is  disabled  by  disease  or  accident  after  the  few 
first  years  or  weeks  of  his  ministry,  he  must  re- 
sign his  charge,  and  of  course  his  means  of  sub- 
sistence, to  some  more  favored  occupant.  Not 
so  the  preacher  of  Methodism.  After  the  expi- 
ration of  the  few  first  years  or  weeks  of  his  min- 
istry, even  though  reduced  by  llic  visitation  of 
Heaven  to  a  state  of  utter  helplessness,  lie  is  en- 
titled to  a  clear  income  for  himself  and  wife  of 
two  hundred  dollars,  or  the  interest  of  three  tlioU' 
sand  three  hundred  and  thirly-ihree  dollars; 
and  his  children  are  also  provided  for.  It  may 
be  questioned  whether  any  man,  minister  or  lay- 
man,  would  be  considered  far  from  the  pathway 
of  wealth,  who,  mfour  years,  or  as  it  may  be,  in 
four  days,  with  scarce  any  previous  expenditure, 
and  with  no  risk  of  pecuniary  loss,  could  realize 
an  annual  income  of  equal  magnitude.  And 
should  the  preacher  survive  for  fifty  years  in  a 
state  of  incapacity,  and  his  wife  be  also  spared, 
they  will  be  entitled  to  draw  the  sum  of  ten  thou- 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  306 

sand  dollars,  besides  the  support  of  their  chil- 
dren. 

Such,  Rev.  Sir,  are  some  of  the  weak  point* 
of  Arminian  Methodism.  We  have  written  some 
things  which  it  has  given  us  pain  to  publish,  and 
may,  perhaps,  give  pain  to  others  to  peruse  ,  but 
we  have  made  no  statement  of  the  truth  of  which 
we  have  the  least  doubt.  Our  motive  has  not 
been  a  spirit  of  proselytism.  That  is  an  employ- 
ment we  freely  surrender  into  the  hands  of  those 
who  may  perchance  see  their  own  likeness  in  the 
following  facts,  taken  from  Dr.  Green's  Chris- 
tian Advocate,  vol.  8,  p.  518  :  "  At  the  distance 
of  a  few  miles  from  my  residence  is  a  very  plea- 
sant county  town.  In  that  town  there  is  a  large 
Baptist  and  Presbyterian  churcli,  in  each  of 
which  there  are  two  sermons  delivered  every 
Lord's  day,  and  one  or  more  lectures  during  the 
week.  The  town  contains  one  member  of  the 
Methodist  church,  and  she  an  old  lady,  so  infirm 
that  she  can  rarely  attend  on  preaching.  And 
yet  in  that  town  for  a  year  and  upwards,  one  of 
their  most  polite  and  declamatory  '*  riders  "  has 
been  preaching;  whilst  many  parts  of  the  sur- 
rounding country  are  as  destitute  as  you  can  well 
imagine.  This  rider  has  been  using  every  ef- 
fort   to    make  Methodists,  but  hitherto  without 


306  THB    DIFFICULT  112 S    OF 

success.     When  I  last  visited  the  place,  the  good 
old  woman  ♦  stood  alone.'  " 

Neither  has  it  been  our  desire  to  render  odious 
the  Methodist  ministers  as  a  body.  That  is  an 
employment,  the  entire  monopoly  of  which  we 
cheerfully  resign  to  those  who  are  the  authors 
and  distributors  of  the  slanderous  tracts  on  which 
we  have  commented,  and  who  are  correctly  de- 
scribed in  the  following  extract  from  the  "  pasto- 
ral letter  of  the  Presbytery  of  Lexington,  Va., 
1827."  "  How  frequently  in  the  midst  of  their 
charitable  professions,  have  even  their  pulpits  re- 
sounded with  severe  denunciations  against  us, 
representing  us  as  a  set  of  hypocritical  formalists 
— as  holding  doctrines  which  came  from  hell  and 
lead  to  hell.  Have  they  not  times  innumerable 
reviled  our  ministers  as  avaricious  hirelings,'* 
&c. 

Nor  have  we  indulged  a  wish  of  the  feeblest 
kind,  to  throw  obstacles  in  the  way  of  Methodism 
in  the  performance  of  the  work  of  benevolence 
and  mercy  to  the  bodies  and  souls  of  men.  So 
far  as  she  publishes,  and  by  every  Scriptural  me- 
thod, promotes  the  salvation  of  immortal  men,  we 
bid  her  "  God  speed."  One  principal  design  of 
what  we  have  written  has  been  to  render  her 
more    "  thoroughly    furnished  unto  every  good 


ARMINIAN    METHODISM.  307 

work;"  that  having  put  on  the  armor  of  truth 
and  righteousness,  and  having  laid  aside  every 
weight,  and  all  her  easily  besetting  sins,  she  may, 
under  the  Captain  of  Salvation,  successfully  fight 
the  battles  of  the  Lord.  That  the  prominent 
leaders  of  the  system  will  be  persuaded  by  one 
whom  they  may  possibly  regard  as  their  enemy 
because  he  tells  them  the  truth,  we  do  not  strong- 
ly anticipate  :  but  that  the  statements  and  reason- 
ings of  the  foregoing  pages  present  to  view  a 
scheme  of  doctrinal  sentiment  and  ecclesiastical 
supervision  incumbered  with  many  difficulties, 
will  not  be  denied  by  any  candid  friend  of  Meth- 
odism. If  the  Scriptures  were  designed  to  be 
our  pattern  in  all  things  pertaining  to  truth  and 
godliness — if  the  decisions  of  reason  founded 
upon  the  word  of  God,  demand  our  respect,  next 
to  the  inspired  oracles  themselves,  we  are  com- 
pelled to  believe  that  much  remains  to  be  done  to 
fashion  Arminian  Methodism  agreeably  to  •' the 
pattern  shewed  in  the  mount."  And  whatever 
else  may  have  been  done  or  left  undone,  one 
thmg,  we  think  has  been  fully  established,  viz  : 
that  there  are  vulnerable  points  connected  with 
the  Arminian  scheme,  which  are  far  from  justify- 
ing the  air  of  arrogance  and  tone  of  denunciation 
so  common  with  its  modern  advocates.  Hoping 
to  meet  many  in    Heaven,  from  whom  on  some 


308  THE    DIFFICULTIES    0¥    &:c. 

points  the  writer  differe'l  on  earth,  he  concludes 
by  subscribing  himself 

Yours,  &c., 

WILLIAM  ANNAN. 


APPENDIX, 

In  this  appendix  we  propose  to  examine  the  reterenCeB 
to  the  Presbyterian  standards,  and  to  several  approved 
writers  among  Presbyterians,  as  the}'  appear  in  a  popular 
Methodist  tract,  entitled  "A  Dialogue  between  a  Predes- 
tinarian  and  his  Friend,"  to  which  allusion  is  made  in 
the  intfoductory  letter.  This  tract,  a  favorite  instrument 
of  sectarian  zeal,  was  written  by  Mr.  Wesley,  and  it  is 
cited  by  Drs.  Bangs,  Fisk,  and  others,  with  such  frequen- 
cy, and  its  blunders  are  copied  and  circulated  with  so 
much  confidence  and  industry,  as  to  justify  an  investiga- 
tion of  its  merits.  We  have  already  seen  (Letter  I.) 
that  by  blindly  following  the  authority  of  this  publication, 
these  learned  gentlemen  have  quoted  the  chapters  of  the 
Assembly's  Catechism,  and  thus  exposed  themselves  to 
the  correction  of  any  well  instructed  Sabbath  scholar. 

This  publication  we  suppose  to  be  one  of  those  meth- 
ods by  which  the  father  of  Methodism  purposed  "to  stop 
the  mouths  of  Calvinists,"  as  he  mildly  expresses  it. 
(Works,  vol.  3,  p.  405.)  And  as  it  stands  in  the  sterec- 
typed  volume  of  tracts,  it  is  graced  with  the  following 
line:  "Out  of  thine  own  mouth"  !  The  truth  of  the  mot- 
to, and  the  suitableness  of  the  tract  to  ansA'er  the  design 
of  its  author  and  distributors,  will  appear  as  we  pass 
along.  We  will  first  notice  the  references  to  the  Assem- 
bly's  Confession,  or  Catechis7ii,  as  they  call  it. 

Friend.  "Sir.  I  have  heard  that  you  make  God  the 
author  of  all  sin,  and  the  destroyer  of  the  greater  part  of 
mankind  without  mercy." 


310 


APPENDIX. 


PREDESTINARIAN.  "I  deny  it;  I  only  say,  *God  did  from 
all  eternity  unchangeably  ordain  whatsoever  conies  to 
pass.'  "  (Assembly's  Catechism.  Chap.  3.) 

Here  it  is  supposed  that  we  are  convicted  ^^out  of  our 
own  mouthy"  of  making  "God  the  author  of  all  sin." 
But  besides  that  the  very  next  words  in  the  Confession 
are — "yet  so  as  neither  is  God  the  author  of  sin," — we 
refer  to  the  Confession  itself,  (quoted  Letter  III.,)  and 
to  the  uniform  testimony  of  Calvinistic  writers  to  prove 
that  they  maintain  the  distinction  between  the  efficient 
and  the  permissive  decrees  of  God.  The  advocates  of 
this  tract  know  this,  or  they  do  not.  If  they  do  not  know, 
then  they  are  not  prepared  to  write  or  reason  upon  the 
subject.  If  they  do  know  it,  we  can  only  pray  that  they 
may  not  receive  judgment  according  to  their  deserts. 
And  as  to  our  holding  that  "the  greater  part  of  mankind 
are  destroyed  without  mercy,"  the  quotation  from  tlic 
Confession  says  nothing  upon  that  subject;  and  until  the 
proof  is  adduced,  it  must  be  considered  as  a  groundless 
assertion. 

F.  Does  sin  necessarily  come  to  pass? 

P.  Undoubtedly.  For  "the  almighty  power  of  God  ex- 
tends  itself  to  the  first  fall,  and  all  other  sins  of  angels 
and  men."  (Assem.  Cat.  chap.  5.) 

This  extract  is  erroneous  and  unfair  in  two  respects. 

1.  It  is  giren  as  a  continuous  quotation,  whereas  two 
whole  lines  are  omitted,  which  are  essential  to  the  sense. 

2.  The  Confession  does  not  say  "the  almighty  power  of 
God  extends  itself  to  the  first  fall,"  &.c.  There  is  no 
such  sentitment  in  the  passage,  which  is  as  follows: — 
"The  almighty  power,  unsearchable  icisdom,  and  infinite 
goodness  of  God,  so  far  manifest  themselves  in  his  provi- 


APPENDIX.  Sli 

dence,  that  IT  (his  providence)  extendeth  itself,"  &Ci 
We  greatly  fear  that  tJiis  method  of  stopping  the  mouths 
of  Calvinists  will  not  redound  to  the  honor  of  its  autlior 
and  advocates. 

We  next  examine  the  references  to  Calvin's  InstituteSi 
1st  reference.  Book  1,  chap.  16,  sect.  8.)  "Nothing  is 
more  absurd  than  to  think  any  thing  at  all  is  done  but  by 
the  ordination  of  God."  Allen,  whose  translation  is  used 
by  Watson,  renders  it  as  follows:  "Nothing  could  be 
more  absurd  than  for  any  thing  to  happen  independently 
of  the  ordination  of  God,  because  it  would  happen  at  ran- 
dom, or  by  chance."  The  object  of  Wesley  was  to  con- 
vict Calvin  of  teaching  that  ^in  was  sO  ordained  as  that 
God  was  its  author.  But  besides  the  mistranslation,  "by 
the  ordination  of  Godj"  as  though  that  were  the  efficient 
cause  of  all  things,  instead  of  ^^independently  qf  ike  ordi- 
nation of  God;''''  just  six  lines  farther  down,  Calvin  quotes 
Augustine  with  approbation,  as  proving  that  "God  is  the 
supreme  and  first  (or  highest)  cause  of  all  things,  because 
nothing  happens  hut  by  his  cominand  or  permission.  He 
docs  not  suppose  God,"  continues  Calvin,  "to  remain  an 
tfZZgs/)eciafor,  determining  to  permit  any  thing"  [and  every 
thing] — that  is,  to  look  listlessly  on  and  resign  the  helm 
of  the  miiverse  to  be  controlled  by  contingence  or  chance. 
"There  is  an  intervention  of  actual  volition  (that  is,  a 
will  to  permit)  which  otherwise  could  never  be  consider, 
ed  as  a  cause."  The  reader  can  now  judge  whether  Cal- 
vin meant  to  teach  that  God  is  the  author  or  efficient  cause 
of  sin,  and  whether  the  above  quotation  by  Wesley  is 
consistent  with  candor  and  truth. 

2d.  (Book  1,  chap.  15  (16)  sect.  3.  "Every  action  and 
motion  of  every  creature  is  governed  by  the  hidden  coun- 
27 


312  APPENDIX. 

eel  of  God,  that  nothing  caii  come  to  pass  but  what  was 
ordained  by  him.''  The  following  is  the  translation  of 
Allen;  "In  the  creatures  there  is  no  erratic  power,  or  ac- 
tion, or  motion;  but  they  are  so  governed  by  the  secret 
counsel  of  God  that  nothing  can  happen  but  what  is  sub- 
ject to  his  knoioledgea.nd  decreed  hy  his  wilV — that  is,  as 
explained  above,  nothing  can  happen  but  by  his  command 
or  permission.  Calvin  is  speaking  of  '■'■the  stars^  arid 
comets,  and  signs  of  heaven,^''  and  rebukes  "immoderate 
and  superstitious  fears,"  as  though  these  "creatures  had 
of  themselves  poicer  to  hurt  us,  or  could  fortuitously  in- 
jure us."  And  though  his  language  admits  of  being  ex- 
tended to  intelligent  moral  agents,  yet  as  explained  above 
by  himself,  it  is  obviously  perverted  by  Wesley  from  its 
original  and  true  meaning. 

3d.  (Book  1,  chap.  15  (16)  sect.  8.)  "The  wills  of  men 
are  so  governed  by  the  will  of  God,  that  they  are  carried 
on  straight  to  the  mark  which  he  has  foreordained." 
This  is  designed  to  show  that  Calvin  taught  that  God 
works  on  the  wills  of  men,  so  as  to  work  ■wickedness  iri 
the  wicked,  and  so  must  be  the  author  of  sin.  But  look  a 
moment  at  the  language  of  Calvin  in  its  connexion:  "Not 
only  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  but  also  the  deliberations 
and  volitions  of  men,  are  so  governed  by  his  providence, 
as  to  be  directed  to  the  end  appointed  by  it.  What  then? 
You  will  say,  does  nothing  h-dppcn  fortuitously  or  cintiTi- 
gently?'"  He  had  set  himself  to  prove  that  there  could 
"6e  no  such  thing  as  fortuitous  contingence,''^  or  chance; 
(sect.  4;)  and  in  the  passage  referred  to  by  the  author  of 
the  tract,  he  was  showing  that  not  even  the  minds, 
thoughts,  and  volitions  of  men  are  exerted  "independent- 
ly of  God,  whilst  they  cannot  even  speak  a  u^ord  but  what 


APPENDIX.  313 

he  chooses."  (Sect.  6.)  But  what  has  this  to  do  with  the 
author  of  sin,  or  the  cause  of  wickedness  in  heart  and 
life?  How  dees  God's  holding  the  hearts  of  men  in  his 
hand  and  turning  them  as  rivers  of  water  are  turned — 
(that  is,  overruling,  restraining,  and  limiting  their  exerci- 
ses, and  especially  their  wickedness) — how  does  this 
prove,  as  the  tract  affirms,  that  "aZZ  must  do  just  what 
they  do"  so  that  they  are  deprived  of  liberty  of  will  and 
free  agency?  The  passage  is  shamefully  misrepresented 
and  perverted  from  its  plain  and  obvious  meaning,  to 
teach  what  Calvin  never  taught,  as  will  yet  more  fully 
appear.  The  scope  of  the  passage  is  to  overthrow  the 
atheistical  notion  of  fortune  or  chance.  Not  a  sparrow 
falls,  nor  a  thought  or  volition  of  the  mind  arises,  but 
what  is  under  the  superintendence  of  the  Divine  Provi- 
dence. God  has  his  own  appointed  ends  in  his  all-wiso 
plan,  to  promote,  even  by  the  wickedness  of  the  wicked, 
and  therefore  it  does  not  occur  by  chance,  but  by  his  per. 
mission,  purposing  so  to  control  and  "restrain"  it  as  to 
make  it  subserve  his  own  wise  and  holy  purposes.  This 
is  the  meaning  of  Calvin.  "Augustine,"  says  Calvin, 
"makes  the  following  correct  distinction. — 'that  they  sin 
proceeds  from  themselves;  that  in  sinning  they  perform 
this  or  that  particular  action,  is  from  the  power  of  God, 
who  divideth  the  darkness  according  to  his  pleasure.' " 
Book  2,  chap.  4,  sect.  4.  Is  this  the  same  as  saying 
*Hheir  sins  proceed  from  God"  ? 

4th.  (Book  3,  chap.  24,  sect.  8.)  "I  will  not  scruple  to 
own  that  the  will  of  God  lays  a  necessity  on  all  things, 
and  that  every  thing  he  wills  necessarily  comes  to  pass." 

The  reference  is  probably  to  a  passage  in  chap.  23, 
8cct.  8.     "I  shall  not  hesitate  to  confess  with  Augustine, 


314  APPENDIX. 

that  the  will  of  God  is  the  necessity  of  things,  and  tliat 
what  he  has  willed  necessarily  comes  to  pass,  as  those 
things  are  really  about  to  hapnen  which  he  has  fore. 
9e€n." 

To  say  that  men  are  under  a  necessity  of  committing- 
sin,  is,  in  the  common  popular  acceptation  of  the  terms, 
both  absurd  and  impious:  and  this  is  what  Wesley  la- 
bors to  prove  against  Calvin.  But  it  is  a  very  important 
question — "What  did  Calvin  mean  by  necessity?"  This 
wc  discover  by  comparing  other  passages — thus — "A  dis- 
tinction has  prevailed  in  the  schools,  of  three  kinds  of  li- 
Jyerty:  the  first,  freedom  from  necessity;  the  second,  free- 
dbm  from  sin;  the  third  freedom  from  misery;  of  which 
ihoJirSt  is  naturally  inherent  in  mctn,  so  that  nothing 
can  ever  deprive  him  of  it;  the  other  two  are  lost  by  sin, 
TTiis  distinction,'''^  a.dds  Calvin,  '^'^I  readily  admit,  except 
that  it  improperly  confounds  necessity  n'ith  coaction. 
And  the  wide  difference  between  these  things  will  appear 
in  another  place'."  (Book  2,  chap.  2,  sect.  5,  &c.)  "When 
man  subjected  himself  to  this  necessity,  he  was  not  de- 
prived  of  will,  but  of  soundness  of  will."  '^Augustine 
thus  expresses  himself:  'The  will  being  changed  for  the 
worse,  I  know  not  by  what  corrupt  and  surprising  means, 
is  itself  the  author  of  (he  ntcessily  to  which  it  is  subject,'' 
&c.  Afterwards  he  says  that  we  are  oppressed  wi*h  a 
yoke,  but  no  other  than  that  of  a  voluntary  servitude,^'' 
&.C.,  «fcc.  Again,  Book  2,  chap.  5,  sect.  5.  "Let  them 
not  suppose  themselves  excused  by  necessity,  in  which 
very  thing  they  have  a  mo^t  evident  cause  of  their  con- 
demnation." "For  if  wc  are  bound  by  our  own  passions, 
which  are  under  the  government  of  sin,  so  that  we  are 
not  at  liberty  to  obey  our  father,  there  is  no  reason  why 


APPENDIX.  315 

we  should  plead  this  necessity  in  our  defence,  the  crimi- 
nality of  which  is  within  ourselves,  and  must  be  imputed 
to  us."  Book  2,  chap.  8,  sect.  3.  "Nor  can  we  pretend 
to  excuse  ourselves  by  our  want  of  ability — our  inability 
is  our  own  fault."  Ibid.  From  these  passages  it  is  evi- 
dent that  the  meaning  of  the  term  "necessity"  in  Cal- 
vin's work,  is  the  same  with  certainty,  or  what  Edwards 
calls  "philosophical  necessity.''''  (Edwards  on  the  Will, 
part  1,  sect.  3.)  So  also  Book  1,  chap.  3,  sect.  9.  "What 
God  decrees,  must  necessarily  come  to  pass,  yet  it  is  not 
by  an  absolute  or  natural  necessity."  He  cites  the  ex- 
ample of  the  "bones  of  Christ,"  which  were  capable  of 
being  broken,"  '  yet  that  they  should  be  broken  was  im- 
possible;"  because  the  Scripture  must  certainly  be  fulfil- 
led— "a  bone  of  him  shall  not  be  broken."  It  seems  that 
prophecy  gives  rise  to  necessity  as  understood  by  Cal- 
vin. 

That  Calvin  is  greatly  misrepresented  in  this  tract,  as 
teaching  necessity  in  such  a  sense  as  "that  all  things 
come  to  pass  by  the  efficacious  and  irresistible  will  of 
God,"  is  further  proved  by  his  representing  men  as  under 
Ihe  restraining  influence  of  divine  grace.  Thus  Book  2, 
chap.  2,  sect  3.  "Should  the  Lord  permit  the  minds  of 
men  to  give  up  the  reins  to  every  lawless  passion,  there 
certainly  would  not  be  an  individual  in  the  world  who 
would  not  evince  all  the  crimes  for  which  Paul  condemns 
human  nature."  This  does  not  look  like  impelling  the 
will  of  man  to  sin  by  inevitable  necessity!!  Indeed  th« 
early  reformers  seem  to  have  been  is  the  habit  of  em- 
ploying the  term  necessity  to  mean  "certainty."  Thus 
Luther,  (de  servo  arbitrio,  translated  by  Milner,  Ecc. 
Hist.  vol.  5.)  "So  long  as  the  operative  grace  of  God  is 
27* 


SIG  APPENDIX. 

absent  from  us,  every  thing-  we  do  has  in  it  a  mixture  of 
evil;  and  therefore  of  necessity  our  works  do  not  avail  to 
salvation.  Here,"  continues  Luther,  "I  do  not  mean  a 
necessity  of  compulsion,  but  a  necessity  as  to  the  certain- 
ty  of  the  event."  Indeed  in  the  very  passage  to  which 
we  suppose  reference  is  made  in  the  tract,  Calvin  explains 
the  meaning  of  the  term  "necessity"  as  used  by  himself, 
to  imply  '^that  those  things  are  really  about  to  happen 
which  God  has  foreseen,"  It  is  not  our  business  to  de- 
cide  whether  Wesley's  misrepresentation  of  the  passage 
was  the  result  of  a  want  of  information,  or  of  something 
else. 

5th.   (Book  3,  chap.  23,  sect.  7.)    "God  not  only  foresaw 
that  Adam  would  fall,  but  also  ordained  that  he  should." 
The  design  of  this  is  obviously  to  convict  Calvin  of  teach- 
ing foreordination  in  such  a  sense  as  to  impl}'  that  sin  Ib 
brought  about  or  efficiently  caused  by  the  divine  decree. 
But  no  person  of  candor  would  ever  understand  Calvin 
thus.     "God,"  says  Calvin,  not  only  foresaw   the  fall  of 
the  first  man,  and  the  ruin  of  his  posterity  in  him,  but  al- 
so arranged  all   by   the  determination  of  his  own  will." 
"It  belongs  to  his  power  to  rule  and  govern  all  things  b}' 
his  hand."     "He  knew  that  it  was  more  suitable  to  his 
Almighty  goodness  to  bring  good  out  of  evil,  than  not  to 
suffer  [or  pern  i']  evil  to  exist,"  and  therefore  "ordauied 
the  life  of  angels  and  men  in  such  a  manner  as  to  exhibit 
in  it,  first,  what  free  will  was  capable  of  doing,  and  after- 
wards, what  could  be  effected  by  the  blessings  of  his  grace 
and  the  sentence  of  his  justice."     Here  the  very  section 
which  is  perverted  to  mean  that  Adam  sinned  nocessari- 
ly,  by  force  of  the  divine  decree — this  very  section  affirms 
that  Adam  was  an  example  of  '■'what  free  agency  icasca- 


APPENDIX.  817 

pahle  of  doing"!     We  should   be   glad   to  indulge   the 
thought  that  this  was  the  effect  of  ignorance. 

6th.    (Book  3,  chap.  24,  sect.  8.)    "He  sinned,  because 
God  so  ordained" — "because  the  Lord  saw  good."     The 
object  of  this  reference   is  the   same  with  the  previous 
one.     There  is  nothing  in  the  place  referred  to,  bearing 
even  the  most  distant  resemblance  to  the  professed  ex- 
tract.    In   chap.  23,  sect.  8,  we  read — "The  first  man 
fell  because  the  Lord   had  determined  it  should  so  hap- 
pen,''    "He  determined  thus,  only  because  he  foresaw  it 
would   tend  to  the  just  illustration  of  the  glory  of  his 
name."     But  no  person  willing  to   do  justice  to  Calvin, 
would  ever  think  of  interpreting  this  to  mean  that  Adam 
sinned  necessarily  by  .force  of  God's  decree.     For  besides 
the  proof  already  given,  that  Calvin  taught  that  sin  was 
ordained  pennisswely,  (though  not  by  a  bare  permission,) 
in  the  very  sarne  section,  and  within  a  few  lines  of  the 
supposed  extract,  we  read — "Man  falls  according  to  the 
(permissive)  appointment  of  Divine  Providence;  but  he 
falls  by  his  own  fault."     "They  insist  that  God  permits 
the  destruction  of  the  impious,  but  does  not  will  it,     But 
what  reason  shall  we  assign  for  his  permitting  it,  but  be- 
cause it  is  his  will  (to  pcrnjit  it.)     It  is  not  probable,  how- 
e.ver,  that  man  procured  his  own  destruction  by  the  mere 
permission,  without  any  appointment  of  God."  (In  other 
words,  without  his  having  appointed  to  overrule  the  fall 
of  man  to  his  own  glory,)     "Besides,"  continues  Calvin, 
"their  perdition  depends  on  the  divine  predestination  in 
such  a  manner  that  the  cause  and  matter  of  it  are  found 
in  themselves."     "Wherefore,  let  us  rather  contemplate 
the  evident  cause  of  condemnation  in  the  corrupt  nature 
of  mankind,  than  search  after  a  hidden  and  altogether 


318  APPENDIX. 

incomprehensible  one,  in  the  predestination  of  God." 
These  passages,  Wesley,  if  he  had  ever  read  the  book, 
must  have  known  to  be  there.  The  very  section  sup- 
posed  to  be  quoted  by  the  tract  to  convict  Calvin  of  hold- 
ing that  God  appoints  or  decrees  sin,  so  that  it  comes  to 
pass  by  his  efficacious  and  irresistible  will, — this  very 
section  affirms  that  "man  sinned  by  his  own  fault" — and 
that  the  cause  and  matter  of  his  perdition  is  in  himself!! 
7th.  (Book  3,  chap.  23,  sect.  7.)  They  deny  that  the 
Scripture  says  God  decreed  Adam's  fall.  They  say  he 
might  have  chosen  either  to  fall  or  not:  and  that  God 
foreordained  only  to  treat  him  according  to  his  desert. 
As  if  God  had  created  the  noblest  of  all  his  creatures, 
without  foreordaining  what  sliould  become  of  him."  The 
design  of  this  reference,  as  of  the  previous  ones,  is  to  con- 
vict Calvin  of  teaching  that  sin  comes  to  pass  necessari- 
ly, that  men  must  do  just  what  they  do,  and  that  they 
sin  under  the  impelling  influence  of  God's  will,  necessa- 
rily and  irresistibly.  But  this  is  an  utter  misrepresenta- 
tion of  Calvin's  meaning.  "They  maintain,"  he  says, 
"that  he  (Adam)  was  possessed  of  free  choice,  that  he 
might  be  the  author  of  his  own  fate;  (this  Calvin  does 
not  dispute;)  but  that  God  decreed  NOTHING  MORE 
than  to  treat  him  according  to  his  desert."  Calvin  ad- 
mits that  Adam  was  possessed  of  free  choice.  Thus, 
Book  1,  chap.  15,  sect.  8.  "Adam  could  have  stood  if  he 
would,  since  he  fell  merely  by  his  own  will."  "His 
choice  of  good  and  evil  was  free."  "He  was  the  volun- 
tary procurer  of  his  own  destruction."  But  he  utterly 
denies  that  God  decreed  "nothing  more  than  to  treat  him 
according  to  his  desert."  And  in  the  very  same  section 
he  goes  on  to  explain  his  meaning — that  "it  belongs  to 


J 


APPENDIX. 


319 


divine  power  to  rule  and  govern  all  things  by  his  hand," 
and  "to  bring  good  out  of  evil."  And  he  rejects  the  idea 
that  "God  had  created  (he  noblest  of  his  creatures  with- 
out any  determinate  end" — that  is,  foreseeing  his  fall,  he 
determined  so  to  rule  and  govern  his  apostacy  and  its  ef- 
fects by  his  hand,  as  in  the  end  to  make  the  wrath  of  man 
to  praise  him,  and  the  remainder  to  restrain,  to  the  glory 
of  his  great  name.  Every  one  must  perceive  what  an  ut- 
ter perversion  of  the  passage  is  made  by  the  author  qf 
the  tract, 

8th.  (Book  3,  chap.  23,  sect.  7.)  "I  confess  it  is  a  har- 
rihle  decree:  yet  no  one  can  deny  but  God  foreknew  Ad- 
am's fall,  and  therefore  foreknew  it  because  he  had  or- 
dained it  by  his  own  decree."  The  following  is  Allen's, 
translation:  "It  is  an  awful  decree,  I  confess;  but  no  one 
can  deny  that  God  foreknew  the  future  final  fate  of  man 
before  he  created  him,  and  that  he  did  foreknow  it  because 
it  was  appointed  (permissively)  by  his  own  decree." 
There  is  a  two-fold  misrepresentation  in  the  version  of 
Wesley,  1.  Calvin  is  speaking  ofthe  awful  fact  that  the 
fall  of  Adam  involves  so  many  nations  and  generations 
of  men  in  sin  and  misery:  it  is  of  this  tremendous  fact  he 
says — "It  is  an  awful  decree,  (or  arrangement;  see  above 
reference  5th,)  I  confess."  But  the  tract  represents  him 
as  speaking  simply  of  the  fall  of  Adam,  without  respect 
to  its  consequences  upon  the  human  family.  2.  Calvir^ 
does  not  say  it  is  "a  horrible  decree,"  as  those  terms  are 
com-monly  understood.  That  Allen  has  correctly  trans- 
lated— "awful  decree" — is  evident  for  two  reasons.  1st. 
The  latin  term  employed  may  with  equal  propriety  b^ 
thus  rendered.  2d.  The  question  is  simply  one  oi  fact. 
Did  Calvin  deeign  to  represent  Predestination  or  the  de- 


320  APPENDIX. 

crees  of  God  as  a  "horrible"  doctrine,  implying  the  ideaa 
conveyed  by  the  terms  shocking,  hideous,  revolting,  odi- 
ous? Let  Calviu  answ^er  for  himself,  and  give  his  ovm 
views  of  the  subject.  Thus  Book  3,  chap.  21,  sect.  1. 
"We  shall  never  be  clearly  convinced  as  we  ought  to  be, 
that  our  salvation  flows  from  the  fountain  of  God's  free 
mercy,  till  we  are  acquainted  with  his  eternal  election, 
which  illustrates  the  grace  of  God,"  ifec.  "Ignorance  of 
this  principle  evidently  detracts  from  the  divine  glory, 
and  diminishes  real  humility."  Again  he  speaks  of  pre- 
destination as  "the  inmost  recesses  of  divine  wisdom," 
and  as  "that  sublimity  of  wisdom  which  God  would  havo 
us  to  adore,  and  not  to  comprehend,  to  promote  our  admi- 
ration of  his  glory."  And  in  a  passage  already  quoted, 
"He  determined  thus,  because  he  foresaw  it  would  tend 
to  the  just  illustration  of  the  glory  of  his  name."  To  say 
that  Calvin  represented  the  decree  of  God  as  "horrible," 
is  contrary  to  his  uniform  declarations, — is  to  represent 
him  as  falling  under  his  own  solemn  rebuke — Book  3, 
chap.  21 ,  sect.  4.  "Whoever  endeavors  to  raise  prejudices 
against  the  doctrine  of  predestination,  openly  reproaches 
God,"  «fec.  In  the  light  of  these  and  many  other  passa- 
ges,  it  is  obvious  that  Wesley's  translation  is  contrary 
to  the  truth. 

9th.  (Book  3,  chap.  23,  sect.  1.)  "Many  indeed,  (think- 
ing to  excuse  God,)  own  election,  and  yet  deny  reproba- 
tion; but  this  is  quite  silly  and  childish.  For  without 
reprobation,  election  itself  cannot  stand;  whom  God  pass- 
es by,  those  he  reprobates." 

This  passage  is  not  materially  mistranslated.  It  is 
adduced  by  Wesley  to  prove  that  "God  has,  according  to 
Calvin,  by  his  own  positive  decree,  not  only  elected  some 


APPENDIX. 


321 


Hien  to  life,  but  also  reprobated  all  the  rest."     The  pass- 
age is  indeed  so  strongly  tinctured  with  reprobation,  that 
one  might  almost  imagine  himself  reading  John  Wesley's 
treatise  on  "Predestination,  Election,  and  Reprobation." 
"God,"  says  Wesley,  ^^predestinates  or  foreappoints  all 
disobedient  unbelievers  to  DAMNATION,  not  without, 
but  according  to,  his  foreknowledge  of  ^11  their  works 
from  the  foundation    of  the  world."     "And  according  to 
this  his  foreknowledge,   (viz.  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world,  or  from  eternity,)  he  refused  or  reprobated  all  dis- 
obedient  unbelievers,    as    such,   TO    DAMNATION." 
What  a  "horrible  decree' '  of  Reprobation!  •  "To  refuse" 
or  "reprobate"  a  man  "to  damnation"  "from  the  founda- 
tion of  the  world,"  before  "he  had  done  either  good  or 
evil,"  yea,  "before  he  was  born" I!  (See  Doct.  Tracts,  pp. 
139,  140.)     Here  it  would  be  in  order  to  declaim  about 
"cruelty,"  "injustice,"  "crocodile's  tears,"  &.c.,  «fec.    The 
doctrine  of  "eternal  reprobation"  is  plainly  a  Methodist 
doctrine!     Are  our  Methodist  friends  atraid  or  ashamed 
to  avow  this  their  real  sentiment! 

10th.  (Book  3,  chap.  31,  sect.  1.)  "All  men  are  not 
created  for  the  same  end;  but  some  are  foreordained  to 
eternal  life;  others  to  eternal  damnation.  So  according 
as  every  man  was  created  for  the  one  end  or  the  other, 
we  say  he  was  elected  or  predestinated  to  life,  or  reproba- 
ted." This  reference  is  to  chapter  31,  whereas  there  are 
only  25  chapters  in  the  book.  The  stereotyped  volume 
of  tracts  has  it  chap.  21,  sect.  1 — but  this  too  is  a  blunder. 
After  considerable  search,  we  found  in  chap.  21,  sect.  5, 
a  passage  which  bears  a  strong  resemblance  to  the  pro- 
fessed extract;  but  from  the  numerous  gross  errors  in 
these  references,  we  must  suppose  that  the  author  of  the 


322  APPENDIX. 

tract  liad  never  seen  the  original  work,  but  was  the  hum* 
ble  copyist  of  some  preceding  bungler.  It  must  be  ad- 
mitted that  Calvin  employs  very  strong  language,  though 
perhaps  not  stronger  than  the  apostle  Jude,  speaking  nC 
"certain  men  crept  in  unawares,"  "ungodly  men,"  "who 
were  of  old  ordained  to  this  condemnation:  (Jude  4:)  nor 
stronger  than  .Peter,  (1  Pet;  2:8,)  "Being  disobedient, 
Whcreunto  also  they  were  appointed:"  nor  stronger  than 
Wesley — "God  foreappointed  all  disobedient  unbelievers 
to  damnation,  not  without,  but  according  to  their  works, 
from  the  foundation  of  the  world:"  or  as  he  afterwards 
explains  himself— God  eternally  reprobated  all  disobedient 
unbelievers,  as  such,  to  damnation*"  If  our  Methodist 
friends  exclaim,  "horrible"!  "most  horrible"!  we  cannot' 
help  it.  There  it  stands  in  tlieir  own  approved  standard 
writings.  '  No  Calvinist  teaches  reprobation  in  stronger 
terms  than  those,  and  as  to  the  Presbyterian  Confession, 
it  does  not  even  employ  the  term  "reprobation.  See  also 
reference  15,  for  Calvin's  views  of  man's  being  created 
for  a  certain  end." 

11th.  (Book  3,  chap.  21,  sect.  7.)  "God  hath  once  for 
all  appointed  by  an  eternal  and  unchangeable  decree,  to 
whom  he  would  give  salvation,  and  whom  he  would  de- 
vote to  destruction."  We  have  just  seen  how  plainly  and 
forcibly  Mr.  Wesley  and  his  followers  teach  "eternal  rep- 
robation," or  reprobation  to  "damnation,"  of  "all  disobe- 
dient unbelievers,  according  to  God's  foreknowledge  ot 
all  their  works,  from  the  foundation  of  tiie  world."  And 
what  is  still  more  remarkable,  in  the  tract,  "Predestina- 
tion calmly  considered,"  they  say — "This  decree  (of  rep- 
robation) without  doubt  God  will  not  change,  and  man 
cannot  resist."  (Doct.  Tracts,  p.  15.)     So  that  they  teach 


APPEj\i/i-K 


32S 


not  only  that  "reprobation  to  damnation"  is   eternal,  but 
that  it  is  unchangeable  and  irresistible! 

12th.  Book  3,  chap.  22,  sect.  1.)  "So  the  vulgar  tliink, 
that  God  as  lie  foresees  every  man  will  deserve,  elects 
them  to  life,  or  devotes  them  to  death  and  damnation." 
Allen  has  it — "It  is  a  notion  commonly  entertained,  that 
God  adopts  as  his  children  such  as  he  foreknows  will  be 
deserving  of  his  grace;  and  devotes  to  the  damnation  of 
death  others  whose  dispositions  he  sees  will  be  inclined 
to  wickedness  and  impiety."  With  regard  to  man's  "de- 
serving divine  grace,"  we  need  only  quote  Article  9  of 
the  Methodist  standards,  viz:  "We  are  accounted  righ- 
teous only  for  the  merit  of  our  Lord,  and  not  for  our  own 
works  or  deservings"!  But  that  Calvin  did  maintain 
that  the  wicked  are  "devoted  to  death  for  their  evil  de- 
serts," has  been  already  showUi  "Their  perdition  de- 
pends on  the  divine  predestination  in  such  a  manner  that 
the  cause  and  matter  of  it  are  found  in  themselves.  "The 
evident  cause  of  condemnation,"  he  says,  "is  the  corrupt 
nature  of  mankind."  (Book  3,  chap.  23,  sect.  8.)  "It 
remains  now  to  be  seen  why  the  Lord  does  that  which  it 
is  evident  he  does.  If  it  be  replied  tliat  (his  is  done  be- 
cause men  have  deserved  it  by  their  impiety,  wickedness 
and  ingratitude,  it  will  be  a  just  and  true  observation." 
(Book  3,  chap.  24,  sect.  14.)  The  prominent  object  be- 
fore Calvin's  mind,  in  the  passage  quoted  in  the  tract,  is 
"the  distinction  between  different  persons,  as  it  appears  in 
the  grace  and  providence  of  God.  He  is  speaking  of 
what  Turretine  and  modern  Calvinists  call  "comparative 
election  and  reprobation" — in  other  words,  of  the  reason 
why  from  the  mass  of  mankind,  all  by  nature  equally  and 
utterly  undeserving,  God  subdues,  converts,  and  saves 
28 


324  APPENDIX. 

one,  and  that  one  oftentimes  the  publican  or  liarlot,  tlie 
most  abandoned  or  profane;  while  others  are  left,  in  many 
casosj  the  most  moral  and  decent  in  their  outward  de- 
portmcnt.  In  this  view  of  the  subject,  the  passage  has  al- 
tdgether  a  different  meaning  from  what  it  is  made  to 
bear  in  Wesley's  tract.  Calvin  takes  for  granted  that  all 
are  "corrupt,"  and  justly  exposed  to  divine  wrath;  where--  , 
as  he  is  quoted  as  teaching  that  men  are  devoted  to  death  ' 
without  any  respect  to  their  deserts.  "We  teach,"  adda 
Calvin,  "nothing  but  that  God  has  always  been  at  liberty 
to  bestow  his  grace  on  whom  he  chooses."  But  the  very 
fact  of  his  bestowing  grace,  supposes  the  recipients  to  be 
undeserving,  or  deserving  of  death.  By  wresting  a  sen- 
tence  or  part  of  a  sentence  out  of  its  connexion,  the  Bible 
can  be  made  to  teach  Atheism! 

13th.  (Book  3,  chap.  23,  sect.  6.)  "God  of  his  own  good 
pleasure  ordains  that  many  should  be  born,  who  are  from 
the  womb  doomed  to  inevitable  damnation."  The  origi* 
nal  latin  of  this  last  phrase  is  "certoe  morti,"  which  every 
school  boy  knows  to  mean  "certain  death,"  and  is  a  very 
different  thing  from  "inevitable  damnation."  An  event 
which  is  infallibly  foreknov^'n,  is  "certainj"  but  as  respects 
the  agents  in  its  accomplishment,  it  may  not  be  "incvi. 
table;"  that  is,  they  may  bring  it  about  in  the  exercise  of 
perfect  freedom  of  choice,  and  may  act  otherwise  if  they 
choose  so  to  act;  although  it  is  infallibly  foreknown  how 
they  will  choose  to  act.  Besides,  if  it  be  true,  as  Wcsky 
says,  that  "God  foreappoints  or  predestinates  all  disobcdi- 
ent  unbelievers  to  damnation,  according  to  his  foreknow- 
ledge of  all  their  works,  from  the  foundation  of  tlic 
world," — "if  (from  eternity)  he  refuses  or  reprobates  all 
disobedient  unbelievers,  as  such,  to  damnation,  how  d  jcj 


APPENDIX.  325 

(his  differ  from  ^'dooming  them  to  certain  death  from 
the  womb"?     "Can  you  split  this  hair?" 

14th.  (Ibid.)  "If  any  man  pretend  that  God's  fore- 
knowledge lays  thera  under  no  necessity  of  being  damn- 
ed, but  rather  that  he  decreed  their  damnation  because 
he  foresaw  their  wickedness;  I  grant  that  God's  fore- 
knowledge  alone  lays  no  necessity  on  the  creature;  but 
eternal  life  and  death  depend  on  the  will  rather  than  the 
foreknowledge  of  God."  This  passage  is  quoted  by  Wes- 
ley, in  immediate  connexion  with  the  foregoing,  and  sev- 
eral lines  are  added  in  such  a  manner  as  to  make  the  im- 
pression that  it  is  a  continuous  quotation.  But  it  is  not 
so.  Besides,  the  passage  is  grossly  misrepresented  to 
teach  that  reprobation,  in  Calvin's  sense  of  the  term, 
does  not  imply  the  foreknowledge  of  man's  sin,  or  that 
man  is  not  considered  in  the  decree  as  fallen  and  deser- 
ving of  punishment.  But  we  trust  enough  has  already 
been  said  to  settle  that  point.  As  to  the  meaning  of  the 
term  "necessity"  in  Calvin's  writings,  it  has  been  alrea, 
dy  explained,  (See  reference  4.)  When  Calvin  says  "life 
and  death  are  acts  of  God's  will  rather  than  of  his  fore- 
knowledge," as  Allen  renders  it,  we  would  just  inquire 
whether  Wesley  means  to  teach  that  Arminian  "reproba- 
tion to  damnation  of  unbelievers,  as  such,"  is  an  act  of 
foreknowledge!  And  when  it  is  added  that  "God  foreseeg 
future  events  in  consequence  of  his  decree  that  they  shall 
happen,"  we  refer  the  reader  to  reference  1,  to  prove  that 
Calvin  taught  the  doctrine  of  the  '■'■permissive  decree"  of 
sin.  And  a  passage  will  presently  be  quoted,  proving  that 
he  held  that  "the  cause  of  sin  does  not  arise  from  God." 
(Sec  liis  Com.  on  Rom.  1:24.)  In  proof  he  quotes  Hosesi, 
J3;9 — "Oh  Israel,  thou  hast  destroyed  thyself:^ 


326  APPENDIX. 

15th.  (Book  3,  chap.  24,  sect.  12.)  "God  has  his  judgf- 
nieiits  toward  the  reprobates,  whereby  he  executes  his  de- 
cree concerning-  them.   (In  other  words,  he  refuses  or  rep- 
robates all  disobedient  unbelievers,  as  such,  to  damna- 
tion.)    As  many  therefore  as  he  created  to  live  miserably 
and  then  perish  everlastingly,  these  that  Ihey  may  be 
brought  to  the  end  for  which  they  were  created,  (may 
"reach  their  appointed  end" — Allen,)  he  sometimes  de- 
prives of  the  possibility  ("opportunity" — Allejt)  of  hear- 
ing the  word,  and  at  other  times,  by  the  preaching  there- 
of, blinds  and  stupifies  them  the  more."     The  first  im- 
portant inquiry,  in  order  to  aright  understanding  of  this 
passage,  is,  what  did  Calvin  mean  by  man  being  "created 
for  a  certain  end"?     If  it  can  be  shown  that  he  employs 
language  equally  strong,  almost  the  very  same  terms,  in 
reference  to  all,  both  elect  and  reprobate,  the  force  of  the 
objection  will  be   done  away.     Well,  look   at  Book  2, 
chap.  16,  sect.  3.  "In  respect  of  our  corrupt  nature,  and 
the  succeeding  depravity  of  our  lives,  WE  ARE  ALL. 
really  offensive  to  God,  guilty  in  his  sight,  and  BORN 
TO  THE  DAMNATION  OF  HELL!"     The  meaning 
evidently  is;  that  men  without  exception,   (one  only  ex- 
cepted,) are  justly  exposed  to  that  awful  doom,  sin  having 
been  fprmitled  to  enter  the    world,  "and  so  death  has 
passsed  upon  all  men,  for  that  all  have  sinned."     That 
God  oftentimes  "deprives  men  of  the  opportunity  of  hear, 
ing  the  gospel;"  that  he  sometimes  "removes  the  candle- 
stick  out  of  his  place"  (Rev.  2:5)  in  just  punishment  for 
misimprovcment  of  past  privilege?,  we  did  not  suppose 
was  denied  by  any  Christian;  nor  that,  for  the  same  rea- 
son, he  sometimes  permits  the  Gospel  to  become  a  savor 
o*^  '^cath  unto  death,  so  as  "to  blind  and  stunify  Ike  iUi?rfi»!! 


APPENDIX.  327 

Do  Methodists  deny  this?  If  any  thing  further  need  be 
said,  to  explain  the  extract  from  Calvin,  we  refer  to  the 
section  before  quoted  for  the  following:  "For  notwith- 
standing we  are  sinners  through  our  own  fault,  yet  we 
are  still  his  creatures;  notwithstanding  we  have  brought 
death  upon  ourselves,  yet  HE  HAD  CREATED  us  for 
life. 

16th.  (Book  3,  chap.  24,  sect,  13.)  "He  calls  to  them, 
that  they  may  be  more  deaf;  he  kindles  a  light,  that  they 
may  be  more  blind;  he  brings  his  doctrine  to  them,  that 
they  may  be  more  ignorant,"  Sec.  In  this  passage,  Cal- 
vin is  expounding  Isajah  6:9,  10.  "Go  and  tell  this  people 
(saith  God  to  the  prophet)  hear  ye  indeed,  but  understand 
not;  and  see  ye  indeed,  but  perceive  not.  Make  the  heart 
of  this  people  fat,  and  make  their  ears  heavy,  and  shut 
their  eyes;  lest  they  see  with  their  eyes,  and  hear  with 
their  ears,  and  understand  with  their  heart,  and  convert, 
and  be  healed."  See  also  Mark  4:12;  Luke  8:10;  John 
12:40.  If  Calvin  has  erred  in  the  use  of  language,  he  is 
certainly  in  very  good  company.  But  the  tract  represents 
liim  as  intending  to  convey  the  idea  that  God  by  direct 
and  positive  inliuence  upon  the  minds  of  the  wicked, 
"hardens,  blinds,  and  stupifies"  their  souls  in  sin,  so  that 
he  is  the  author  of  their  wickednes.  But  he  himself  else- 
where interprets  his  language  to  mean,  "the  righteous 
judgment  of  God,"  or  "the  righteous  vengeance  of  God, 
in  abandoning  the  hearts  of  the  stubborn  and  rebellious 
to  Satan,  to  be  confirmed  in  obstinacy."  But  Dr.  W. 
I'isk,  speaking  in  the  name  of  the  General  Conference, 
says — "Ged  blinds  men  and  hardens  their  hea.rts  judicial- 
ly, as  a  just  punishment  lor  their  abuse  of  their  agency." 
Discip.  p.  9.  Speaking  of  Satan,  Calvin  observes — "He 
28* 


828  APPENDIX. 

being  naturally  wicked,  has  not  the  least  inclination  to- 
wards obedience  to  the  Divine  will,  but  is  \vholly  bent  on 
insolence  and  rebellion.  It  therefore  arises  from  himself 
and  his  wickedness  that  he  opposes  God — but  since  he 
holds  him  tied  and  bound  witli  the  bridle  of  his  power,  he 
executes  only  those  things  wliich  are  divinely  permitted; 
and  thus  whether  he  will  or  not,  lie  obeys  his  creator,  be- 
ing constrained  to  fulfil  any  service  to  which  he  impels 
Piim."  Book  1,  chap.  14,  sect.  17.  "Tliey  (the  wicked) 
can  lay  no  blame  upon  God,  for  they  find  in  themselves 
nothing  but  evil;  and  in  him  only  a  legitimate  use  of  their 
wickedness,"  Chap.  17,  sect.  5.  ''This  exception  must 
alwaj's  be  made,  that  the  cause  of  sin,  whose  roots  perpe- 
tually dwell  in  the  sinner  himself,  docs  not  arise  from 
Codr  Com.  on  Rom,  1:21. 

17th,  (Book  1,  chap.  17,  sect.  5.)  "Thieves,  murderers, 
and  other  malefactors,  are  God's  instruments  which  he 
uses  to  execute  what  he  hath  decreed  in  himself."  The 
design  of  this  extract  is  to  convict  Calvin  of  teaching  that 
*'God  by  his  present  irresistible  power  and  will,  is  the  au- 
thor of  those  actions  which  are  sins,  and  of  tlie  sins  them- 
selves." "I  admit,"  says  Calvin,  "that  thieves,  homi- 
cides, and  other  malefactors,  arc  instruments  of  Divine 
Providence,  whom  the  Lord  uses  for  the  execution  of  the 
judgments  which  he  hath  appointed."  By  examining 
the  scope  of  the  passage,  it  will  be  found  that  the  design 
of  Calvin  was  directly  the  opposite  of  that  which  Wesley 
charges  upon  him.  "Persons,"  he  says,  "inconsiderately 
and  erroneously  ascribe  all  past  events  to  the  absolute 
Providence  of  God."  '*Since  neither  thefts,  nor  adulte- 
ries, nor  homicides  are  perpetrated  without  the  intervcn- 
*'on  of  the  divine  will,  '  .vhy,'  they  ask,  'shall  a  homicide 


APPENDIX.  32^ 

be  punished  for  having-  slain  him  whose  life  the  Lord  had 
terminated.  If  all  such  characters  are  subservient  to  the 
Divine  will,  why  shall  they  be  punished?'  'But  I  deny," 
replies  Calvin,  "that  they  serve  the  Divine  Aviil.  For  we 
cannot  say  that  he  who  is  influenced  by  a  wicked  heart, 
acts  in  obedience  to  God."  But  it  is  said  if  he  would 
not  permit  it,  we  should  not  do  it.  This  I  grant.  But 
do  we  perform  evil  actions  with  the  design  of  pleasing- 
him?  We  precipitate  ourselves  into  them,"  &c.  Is  this 
the  same  as  saying  "men  commit  sinful  actions  by  the 
present  irresistible  power  and  will  of  God""?  See  also  the 
quotations  in  the  previous  reference.  Calvin  is  speaking' 
of  "the  legitimate  use"  which  God  makes  of  his  unholy 
creatures,  and  not  at  all  of  his  irresistible  power  in  cau- 
sing their  actions,  "So  when  the  matter  and  guilt  of 
evil  resides  in  a  bad  man,  why  should  God  be  supposed 
to  contract  any  defilement,  if  he  uses  his  service  accor- 
ding- to  his  own  pleasure;"'  in  other  words,  if  he  "makes 
liis  wrath  to  praise  him,"  &c.  The  use  which  the  au- 
thor of  the  tract  makes  of  Calvin's  language  "can  hardly 
be  reconciled  with  a  guileless  Christianity.*' 

18th.  (Book  1,  chap.  17,  sect.  11.)  "The  devil  and  wick- 
ed  men  are  so  held  in  on  every  side  with  the  hand  of  God, 
that  they  cannot  conceive,  or  contrive,  or  execute  any 
mischief  any  farther  than  God  himself  doth  not  permit 
only,  but  command.  Nor  are  they  only  held  in  fetters, 
but  compelled  also  with  a  bridle  to  perform  obedience  to 
those  commands.  T  his  is  given  as  a  Calvinistic  answer 
to  the  question — "How  does  God  make  angels  and  men 
sin?"  and  is  designed  to  convict  Calvin  and  Calvinists  of 
holding  that  "God  procures  adultery,  cursings,  lyings, 
and   by  his  working  on  the  hearts  of  the  wicked,  bends 


330  APPENDIX. 

and  stirs  them  to  do  evil."  IJut  the  author  of  't'le  Insti- 
tutes' is  grossly  slandered  in  this  representation.  "It  is 
remarkable  that  the  Socinians,  Papists,  and  Pelagians  of 
Turretine's  day,  employed  the  same  passage  to  bring 
odium  upon  Calvin  and  his  theological  sentiments.  Tur- 
rctine  replies  that  it  was  cited  dishonestly,  ['mala  fide,'] 
*and  contrary  to  the  mind  of  the^author.'  'For  the  scope 
of  the  passage  is  to  fortify  the  minds  of  the  pious  against 
ft^ar  and  anxiety,  inasmuch  as  they  know  that  the  devil 
and  wicked  men  are  not  permitted  to  roam  without  re- 
straint, but  are  under  the  government  and  direction  of  di- 
vine providence.'  Calvin  has  no  reference  at  all  to  the 
cause  of  sin,  but  is  speaking  of  the  limits  which  God  in 
his  providence  sets  to  the  rage  and  malice  of  the  wicked; 
and  thence  he  derives  a  topic  of  consolation  to  the  pious, 
'when  they  recollect  that  the  devil  and  the  whole  army 
of  the  wicked  are  so  restrained  by  divine  power,  that  they 
can  neither  conceive  of  any  hostility  against  us,  nor  after 
having  conceived  it,  form  a  plan  for  its  accomplishment, 
nor  even  move  a  finger  towards  the  execution  of  such 
plan,  any  faither  than  he  hath  permitted  and  even  com- 
manded  them.  They  are  not  only  bound  by  his  chain 
but  compelled  to  do  lam  service.'  Is  this  the  same  as 
saying  that  'God  bends  and  stirs  them  to  commit  adulte- 
ries, cursings,  lyings'?  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  Wesley 
liad  repented  of  his  sin  in  composing  this  tract,  before  he 
was  called  to  render  his  account  to  the  Judge  of  all. 

But  it  is  proper  to  inquire,  what  is  the  meaning  of  Cal- 
vin when  he  represents  Satan  and  wicked  men  as  so  con- 
trolled and  restrained  by  divine  power,  as  to  do  what  God 
not  only  ^permits,  but  commands.  He  doubtless  refers  to 
such  cases  as  that  of  Job.     God  said — "Behold  all  that  he 


APPENDIX.  331 

hath  is  in  thy  power."  This  was  said  to  Satan,  in  answer 
to  his  insolent  challenge — 'Doth  Job  fear  God  for  nought? 
Put  forth  thy  hand,  iVc.  and  he  will  curse  thee  to  thy 
face.'  And  the  pious  sufferer  himself  ascribes  his  afflic^ 
tion,  not  to  Satan,  but  to  God.  'The  Lord  gave,  and  the 
Lord  taketh  away,'  &,c.  And  again,  "the  Lord  said  un- 
to Satan — 'Behold,  he  is  in  thine  hand,  but  save  his  life." 
(chap.  2:6.)  'Even  the  devil  himself,'  remarks  Calvin, 
'dared  not  to  attempt  any  thing  against  Job,  without  his 
permission  and  command.'  (Bock  1,  chap.  17,  sect.  7.) 
The  conduct  of  Shimci  in  cursing  David,  is  another  ex-, 
ample,  'So  let  him  curse,'  said  the  afflicted  monarch, 
♦because  the  Lord  hath  said  unto  him,  'curse  David.' 
Let  him  alone,  and  let  him  curse,  for  the  Lord  hath  bid^ 
den  him.'  (2  Sam.  16j10,  11.)  «^When  he  confesses  Shi- 
mei's  maledictions  to  proceed  from  the  divine  command,^ 
remarks  Calvin,  he  by  no  means  commends  his  obedience 
as  fulfilling  adivineprecept;  but  acknowledging  his  tongu© 
as  the  scourge  of  God,  he  patiently  submits  to  the  chas^ 
tisement.  Let  it  be  remembered  that  whilst  God,  by- 
means  of  the  impious,  fulfils  his  secret  decrees,  they  aro 
not  excusable  as  though  they  were  obedient  to  his  pre- 
cepts, which  they  wantonlj'  and  intentionally  violate.* 
(Book  1,  chap.  18,  sect.  4.)  'Augustine  somewhere 
makes  the  following  correct  distinction:  that  they  sin 
proceeds  from  themselves;  that  in  f-inning  they  perform 
this  or  that  particular  action,  is  from  the  power  of  God, 
who  divideth  the  darkness  according  to  his  pleasure.' 
(Book  2,  chap.  4,  sect.  4.)  Is  this  the  same  as  saying 
that  God  makes  angels  and  men  sin!  Is  it  consistent 
with  truth  or  righteousness  to  charge  Calvin  with  tea-att 


332  APIMCXDIX. 

iiig  that  'vj!oil  makes  men  and  angels  ahx  by  his  pre- 
sent irrcs  stiblc  power'?  'Oh,  shame!  where  is  thy 
blushl' 

Wc  have  felt  it  to  be  our  duty  to  vindicate  the  charac 
tcr  of  Calvin  from  the  unfounded  allcg;;tions  of  Wesley 
and  his  followers,  not  because  wc  as  Presbyterians,  con- 
sider ourselves  obliged  to  adopt  and  defend  every  expres- 
sion, or  every  shade  of  thought  which  he  may  have  em- 
ployed upon  theological  subjects.  We  have  the  public 
symbols  of  our  faith  in  our  Confession  and  Catechisms; 
and  although  we  feel  it  to  be  no  reproach  to  be  callccl 
Calvinists,  yet  we  call  no  man  master.  This  defenco 
(would  that  it  were  much  more  perfect)  we  believe  to  bo 
due  to  the  cause  of  truth — to  the  character  of  the  dead, 
which  has  been  unjustly  assailed — and  to  the  dearest  in, 
torests  of  the  living,  who  are  attempted  to  be  held  up  to 
public  odium,  disgust,  and  abhorrence,  by  means  of  dis, 
torted  and  false  representations  of  the  sentiments  of  those 
men,  whom  they  have  been  accustomed  to  regard  with 
profound  respect  and  reverence.  No  sane  person  will 
imagine  that  t!ic  wide  circulation  of  the  forementioned  and 
similar  tracts,  is  intended  for  any  other  purpose  than  tq 
fasten  the  designed  reproach  qf  their  injurious  statements 
and  misrepresentations  upon  thosfc  who  are  now  called 
Calvinists.  Every  candid  reader  will,  we  hope,  be  now 
qualified  to  decide  where  the  ignominy  should  fall,  whe- 
ther they  or  their  slanderers  should  be  regarded  with  pub, 
lie  detestation. 

We  next  examine  the  professed  quotations  from  the 
writings  of  Dr.  Twissc;  and  I  gratefully  acknowlcdgo 
the  assistance  afforded  by  rhj'  friend,  Kev.  M.  IJ.  Hupk^ 


APPENDIX.  333 

(late  of  the  Tlieological  Seminary,  Princeton,  N.  J.,  now 
Missionary  of  the  American  Board,)  in  investigating  the 
works  of  this  and  other  scarce  authors,  in  the  Libraries 
of  the  Seminary. 

1st  (Vindicise  Gratise  &.c.  pars  3,  p.  19.)  'It  is  impos- 
sible any  thing  should  ever  be  done  but  that  to  whicl* 
God  impels  the  will  of  man."     We  have  already  seen 
(Letter  I.)  that  Dr.  T.  defines  the  will  of  God  to  be  'his 
purpose  to  do  or  permit  any  thing-/  He  does  not  admit  that 
the  divine  will  (voluntas  dei)  is  necessarily  efficient,  in 
the  sense  of  being  the  cause  of  ail  events;  but  he  asserts 
merely  that  nothing  can  come  to  pass  without  the  will 
(either  efficacious  or  permissive)  of  God.  Dr.  T.  also  takes 
much  pains  to  show  that  the  divine  will  does  not  inter-' 
fere  with  the  perfect  freedom  of  men  in  any  of  their  mo-* 
ral  actions.      'Ego  constanter  nego,'  says  he,  'energetic 
cum  Dei  decretum,  quicquam  prsejudicare  libertati  crea-^ 
tura3,  sed  potius  stabilire  et  corroborare.'     In  connection 
with  Wesley's  extract.  Dr.  Twissc  also  largely   explain® 
the  distinction  between  what  is  physical  in  moral  action, 
and  what  is  moral,  'bonum  ant  malum.'     Of  the  act,  con- 
sidered   as  physical,  he  admits  that  God  is  the  author,, 
'for  in  him  we  live,  and  move,  and  have  our  being.'     But 
this  is  another  and  a  very  different  thing  from  'impelling' 
the  will  of  man  to  wickedness,  which  he  utterly  disclaims 
and  strenuously  denies  to  be  a  part  of  his  scheme,-  as  wilt 
more  fully  appear  under  the  next  reference.     This  dis- 
tinction will  also  explain  what  Dr.  T.  means  by  saying 
'God  is  the  author  of  that  action  which  is  sinful,'  &c. 
He  is  the  author  of  the  action,  (physically  considered,) 
but  not  the  author  of  that  which  is  sinful  in  the  ac  ion. 
If  Wesley  and  his  followers  have  found  out  some  other 


SS4  APPENDIX. 

god,  'in  wliom  \vc  live,  move,  and  havo  our  being,'  than 
the  apostle  Paul  know  and  worshipped,  the  world  may  ex* 
pect  to  be  put  in  possession  of  the  discovery. 

2d.  (Vindicia?  pars  3,  p.  22.)  'God  necessitates  them 
only  to  the  act  of  sin,  not  to  the  deformity  of  sin."  This 
is  not  a  fair  translation  of  any  passage  we  have  been  able 
to  find.  And  the  latter  part  of  the  professed  quotation^ 
'when  God  makes  angels  or  men  sin,'  &c.,  we  are  persua- 
ded is  a  gross  misrepresentation.  'Quid  quodhodie,'  says 
Twissc,  'satis  constat  inter  theologos,  impossible  esse 
quicquam  fieri,  cujus  auctor  non  sit  Dcus,  quoad  subsian- 
tiam  actus.  Neque  minus  luculertum  est  Jieri  non  posse 
ut  Deus  sit  auctor  malitics  aut  peccati,  qua  peccatum 
est.'  That  is,  'It  is  satisfactorily  proved  among  theolo- 
gians of  the  present  day,  that  nothing  can  take  place  of 
which  God  is  not  the  author,  as  respects  the  substance  of 
the  act.  Nor  is  it  less  evident  that  it  cannot  he  that  God 
should  be  the  author  of  evil  or  sin,  as  respects  its  moral 
turpitude.'  Is  this  the  same  as  to  say,  'God  makes  an- 
gels and  men  sin'!  And  in  regard  to  the  views  of  Dr. 
Twisse  on  the  subject  of  necessity,  the  fallowing  are  his 
own  words:  'Whereas  we  see  some  things  come  to  pass 
necessarily,  some  contingently,  so  God  hath  ordained  that 
all  things  shall  come  to  pass:  but  necessary  things  neces- 
sarily,  and  contingent  things  contingently,  that  is,  avoid- 
ably,  and  with  a  possibility  of  not  coining  to  pass — for 
every  university  scholar  knows  this  to  be  tlic  notion  of 
contingency.'  Ch.  Spec,  vol  7,  p.  165.  Is  this  equivalent 
to  saying  that  'all  things  come  to  pass  by  the  efficacious 
and  irresistible  will  of  God'? 

Piscator  is  the  next  author  who  suffers  the  process  of 
misrepresentation  and  distortion.     He  is  professedly  quo- 


APPENDIX.  335 

ted  as  follows:  'God  made  Adam  and  Eve  for  this  verv 
purpose,  that  they  might  be  tempted  and  led  into  sin; 
and  by  force  of  his  decree  it  could  not  otherwise  be,  but 
they  must  sin.'  'The  reprobates  more  especially,  who 
were  predestinated  1o  damnation^''  &c.  'We  neither  can 
do  more  good  than  we  do,  nor  less  evil  than  we  do:  be- 
cause God  from  eternity  has  precisely  ordained  that  both 
the  good  and  the  evil  should  be  so  done.'  One  part  of 
these  extracts,  which  we  have  put  in  italics,  reminds  us 
of  Wesley's  'horrible'  decree  of  reprobation,  viz:  'God 
predestinates  or  foreappoints  all  disobediert  unbelievers 
to  damnation,  according  to  his  foreknowledge  of  all  their 
works  from  the  foundation  of  the  world.  The  writings 
of  Piscutor  referred  to,  we  have  not  been  able  to  procure, 
but  the  following  extract  from  his  commentary  on  Acts 
2:23,  will  exhibit  his  real  sentiments:  'Impiorum  scelera 
pendent  a  decreto  Dei,  quia  Deus  decrevit  permittere  Sa- 
tauEB,  ut  eos  ad  scelera  impellat.  Nee  Deus  malitiam  in. 
stillet,  nee  illi  respiciant  ad  volentatem  Dei,  sed  ad  ex- 
plendum  libidines  suas,  idque  contra  expressa  interdicta 
Dei.'  That  is,  'The  wicked  actions  of  impious  men  de- 
pend upon  the  divine  decree;  because  God  has  decreed  to 
per7nit  Satan  to  instigate  them  to  deeds  of  crime.  Nei- 
ther does  God  instil  evil  into  their  minds,  nor  do  they 
have  respect  to  the  divine  will,  but  to  the  fulfilment  of 
their  evil  desires  and  lusts,  and  that  contrary  to  his  ex- 
press prohibition.'  Is  this  the  same  as — 'God  procures 
adultery,  cursings,  lyings,'  and  'by  force  of  his  decree  it 
could  not  otherwise  be  but  they  must  ein'?     Oh  shame! 

Zanchius  (De  natura  Dei,  pp.  553 — 554)  is  next  quoted 
as  follows:  'Both  the  reprobates  and  the  elect  were  foreor- 
dained to  sin,  as  sin,  that  the  glory  of  God  might  b«  decla= 
29 


336  AI'PKNDIX. 

red  tliereby.'  We  have  already  in  our  introductory  let- 
ter shown  that  this  author  taught  directly  the  reverse  of 
the  sentiment  charged  against  him,  viz:  that  'all  men  are 
so  far  the  subjects  of  foreordination  as  to  he  permitted  to 
Bin,'  Hear  him  still  farther:  'Deus  ut  in  nomine  autor 
st  peccati,  quatenus  peccatum  est;  ita  neminem  ad  pcc- 
catum  quatenus  peccatum  est,  admittendum  predestina- 
vit.  Nam  odit  peccatum  Dcus,  ut  peccatum  est.  Ac 
proinde  ad  illud  quatenus  tale  est  neminem  dicendus  pre» 
deetinasse,'  &c.  In  these  extracts  the  author  asserts,  di- 
rectly in  the  face  of  Wesley's  quotation,  that  God  does 
not  foreordain  sin,  as  eini!  The  following  passages  arc 
from  his  treatise  on  'Absolute  Predestination,'  translated 
by  Toplady:  'By  the  purpose  or  decree  of  God,  we  mean 
hie  determinate  counsel  whereby  he  did  from  all  eternity 
preordain  whatever  he  should  do,  or  would  permit  to  bo 
done  in  time.'  'Predestination,  as  regards  the  reprobate 
18  that  eternal,  most  holy,  sovereign,  and  immutable  act 
of  God's  will,  whereby  he  hath  determined  to  leave  (or 
permit)  some  men  to  perish  in  their  sins,  and  to  be  justly 
punished  for  them.'  'God  does  not  (as  we  are  slander- 
ously reported  to  affirm)  compel  the  wicked  to  sin,  as  the 
rider  spurs  on  an  unwilling  horse.  God  only  says  in  ef- 
fect that  tremendous  word,  LET  THEM  ALONE.'  "Tis 
most  certainly  his  will  to  permit  sin,  but  he  cannot  be 
himself  the  author  of  it.'  'He  alone  is  entitled  to  the 
name  of  the  true  God,  who  governs  all  things,  and  with- 
out whose  will  (efficient  or  permissive)  nothing  can  be 
done.'  'From  what  has  been  said,'  continues  Zanchiug, 
'it  follows  that  Augustine,  Luther,  Buccr,  and  other  learn- 
ed divines,  are  not  to  be  blamed  for  asserting  that  God 
may  in  iome  sens«  be  said  to  will  the  being  and  com- 


APPENDIX.  337 

mission  ofein.  For  was  this  contrary  to  his  determining^ 
will  of  permission,  either  he  would  not  be  omnipotent,  or 
fin  could  have  no  place.'  'No  one  can  deny  that  God 
permits  sin;  but  he  neither  permits  it  ignorantly  nor  un- 
willingly; therefore  knowingly  and  willingly.  Luther 
stedfastly  maintains  this  in  his  book,  'De  Servo  Arbitrio.' 
(The  will  a  slave.')  However  it  should  be  carefully  no= 
ticed,  1st.  That  God's  permission  of  sin  does  not  arise 
from  his  taking  delight  in  it.  Sin,  as  sin,  is  the  abomi- 
nable thing  that  his  soul  hateth.  2.  That  God's  free  and 
voluntary  permission  of  sin,  lays  no  man  under  any  forci- 
ble or  compulsive  necessity  of  committing  it.  Nor  is  he 
in  the  proper  sense  accessary  to  it,  but  only  remotely 
and  negatively  so,  inasmuch  as  he  could,  if  he  pleased, 
absolutely  prevent  it.'  In  view  of  these  extracts,  we 
leave  the  reader  to  decide  whether  Zanchius  has  been  fair- 
ly dealt  with  by  Wesley  and  his  Arminian  followers, 

Peter  Martyr  (Comment  in  Rom.  pp.36 — 413)  comes 
next,  as  follows:  'God  supplies  wicked  men  with  oppor- 
tunities  of  sinning,  and  inclines  their  hearts  thereto.  He 
blinds,  deceives,  and  seduces  them.  He,  by  his  working 
on  their  hearts,  bends  and  stirs  them  to  do  evil.'  Now 
with  this  compare,  or  rather  contrast  the  following:  'God 
doth  not  properly  stir  up  men  unto  sin;  but  yet  he  useth 
the  sms  of  wicked  men,  and  also  guideth  them,  lest  they 
should  pass  beyond  their  bounds.'  'The  defect,  which 
properly  is  sin,  proceedeth  not  of  God;  but  the  action, 
which  is  a  natural  thing,  wherein  the  defect  sticketh, 
cannot  be  drawn  forth  but  by  the  common  influence  of 
God.'  Is  this  the  same  as  to  say,  'God,  by  his  working 
on  their  hearts,  bends  and  stirs  them  to  evil,'  &.c.  Our 
quotations  are  from  his  'Common  Places.'     His  comment 


338  APPENDIX. 

on  Romans,  as  also  thg  works  of  Zuin^^leon  'Providence,* 
we  have  not  been  able  to  procure.  But  from  the  speci- 
mens which  have  passed  before  up,  we  may  readily  sup- 
pose they  have  not  been  handled  more  fairly  than  the 
others. 

We  have  now  finished  our  examination  of  the  tract, 
'A  Dialogue  between  a  Prcdestinarian  and  his  Friend,' 
We  can  only  say  that  it  exhibits  a  melancholy  view  of 
men  and  measures  professedly  aiming-  at  the  promotion 
of  truth.  The  slumbers  of  the  dead  will  not  be  broken,- 
even  though  they  should  be  made  to  tench  sentiments 
which,  while  employed  in  the  active  scenes  ofearth,  they 
abhorred.  And  as  respects  the  living,  whose  character 
and  influence  have  been  invaded,  and  attempted  to  be 
destroyed  they  have  long  since  learned  from  the  highest 
authority,  to  expect  that  men  will  'say  all  manner  of  evil 
of  them.'  From  Alexander  Campbell,  who  affirms  that 
'Calvinism  is  worse  than  Atheism,'  we  receive  it  as  an 
evidence  and  result  of  that  conflict  which  must  always 
exist  between  light  and  darkness:  but  from  those  who 
p|_ofess  to  believe  that  'Calvinism  contains  all  that  truth 
by  which  men  may  be  saved,'  (Watson,  vol.  2,  p.  149,)  wo 
did  exfcct  better  things! 

We  cannot  close  the  discussion,  already  protracted  much 
beyond  its  original  design,  without  noticing  the  fact,  th:it 
besides  the  instrumentality  of  their  Tract  Society,  the 
Sabbath  School  and  the  day  of  sacred  rest  are  made  to 
contribute  to  the  same  unhallowed  enterprize.  In  No. 
32,  p.  9(),  of  the  'Methodist  Sunday  School  and  Youth's 
Ivibrary,'  they  state  the  doctrine  of  predestination  as  fol- 
lows:  ^  riiA  God  has  by  an  eternal  and  unchrmgoaHe  dr. 
crcc,  predestinated  to  eternal  dam-nation  by  far  the  grca- 


APPEND'X.  339 

ter  port  of  mankind,  and  that  absolutely,  without  any  re- 
spect to  their  works,  but  only  for  the  showing  of  he  glor 
ry  of  his  justice.  And  that  for  the  bringing  this  about, 
he  hath  appointed  these  miserable  souls  necessarily  to 
walk  in  their  wicked  ways,  that  so  his  justice  may.lay 
hold  of  them.'  To  those  who  have  read  the  foregoing 
letters,  and  the  previous  parts  of  this  appendix,  we  need 
not  say  that  this  is  not  the  doctrine  taught  in  the  Presby- 
terian Confession,  and  by  our  approved  writers.  The 
minister  who  should  dare  broach  such  a  sentiment  in  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  w^ould,  we  doubt  not,  be  biouglit  to 
trial  for  heresy  and  impiety.  The  author  of  the  Sunday 
School  book  puts  the  passage  in  quotation  marks;  but  ex- 
cept by  such  unfair  and  dishonorable  treatment  as  w© 
have  already  exposed,  we  challenge  the  preachers  to  pro- 
duce such  a  passage  from  any  of  our  approved  authors. 

To  fasten  the  impression  upon  the  minds  of  the  young 
and  unsuspecting  that  this  is  a  true  exhibition  of  the  doc- 
trine, they  are  presented  with  the  usual  array  of  referen- 
ces to  Calvin  and  others.  And  lest  the  point  and  direc- 
tion of  tl.ie  whole  should  be  misunderstood,  the  Presbyte- 
rian Confession  of  Faith  comes  in  for  its  share  of  perver- 
sion and  misrepresentation.  We  have  a  repetition  of  Dr. 
Fisk's  unrighteous  quotation  of  chap.  3,  sect.  5:  'Chosen 
in  Christ  unto  everlasting  glory,  without  any  ^foresight  of 
fuith  or  good  works,  as  conditirms  or  causes  mocing  him 
thereto.^  The  clause  in  italics.  Dr.  Fisk  and  the  Sunday 
School  book  both  carefully  omit,  for  a  very  obvious  reason, 
"The  phrases  'eternal  election,'  and  'eternal  decree  of 
election,'  "  remarks  Watson,  "can  in  common  sense  mean 
only  an  eternal  purpose  to  elect  or  choose  out  of  the  world 
and  sanctity  ia  time  by  the  ^rpirit  and  blood  of  Christ." 


340  APPE\DI\'. 

'This  is  a  doctrine  which  no  one  will  contend  with  them.* 
Very  well.  Is  it  supposed  then  that  this  eternal  purpo8<» 
•to  choose  and  sanctify'  was  founded  on  a  foresight  of 
faith  and  good  works,  in  other  words,  on  a  foresight  of 
sanctification?  That  is,  that  God  foresaw  the  sanctifica 
tion  of  certain  persons,  and  then  purposed  to  choose.^and 
sanctify  them?  Truly  it  is  a  useless  kind  of  election  this, 
to^purpose  to  sanctify  those  whom  he  foresaw  to  be  pre- 
viously sanctifiedl 

Again:  They  suppress  the  clause  which  wc  italicise, 
in  chap.  3,  sect.  7  of  the  Confession.  Thus:  'The  rest  of 
mankind,  God  was  pleased  for  the  glory  of  his  sovereign 
power  over  his  creatures,  to  pass  by,  and  to  ordain  to  dis- 
honor and  wrath,  for  their  sin^  to  the  praise  of  his  glori- 
ous justice.^ 

Other  equally  humiliating  examples  might  be  adduced 
from  this  volume  ul"  instruction  fur  youth,  of  the  strange 
methods  adopted  by  some  professedly  Christian  men,  to 
promote  Christianity.  We  can  only  say,  whether  these 
things  be  the  alphal)et  or  the  higher  branches  of 'sinless 
perfection,'  'O  my  soul,  come  not  thou  into  their  secret, 
unto  their  assembly,  n~iine  honor,  be  not  thou  unitedl' 

The  line  of  policy,  of  which  these  unrighteous  doings 
arc  prominent  features,  deserves  a  moment's  further  no- 
tice. The  Tract  Society  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  is  employed  to  deluge  our  country  with  such  pub- 
lications as  those  which  have  passed  under  review.  This 
they  tell  the  people  is  Calvinism,  and  these  the  genuine 
doctrines  believed  by  Calvinists.  But  lest  they  should 
be  speedily  convicted  of  bearing  'false  witness  against 
their  neighbors,'  they  have  mvented  'Duplicity  Exposed,' 
the  topBtone  of  the  system.     If  Presbyteriansi,  Congrega- 


APPENDIX.  341 

tionaliats,  and  other  Calvinists,  indignantly  resent  thia  un- 
hallowed  attempt  to  fasten  upon  them  the  most  impiouB 
and  abominable  sentiments,  their  'duplicity'  must  be  ex- 
posed— they  are  afraid  or  ashamed  to  publish  their  real 
views  on  certain  points — they  teach  and  preach  what 
they  believe  to  he  false,  &,c.  &c.  Surely  the  cause  must 
be  bad  which  is  supposed  to  require  the  use  of  such  des- 
perate supports  and  remedies.  And  yet  the  authors  and 
zealous  advocates  of  these  publications  will  talk  in  eleva- 
ted style,  of  Hhelr  friendship  and  high  regard  for  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  and  of  their  valued  acquaintance 
with  many  of  her  ministers,  and  not  a  few  of  her  mem- 
bers.' 'Such,  they  v»'ill  say,  'are  their  good  Presbyterian 
brethren,^  &c.,  &c.  (See  Cook's  'Refutation.')  We  make 
no  pretentions  to  the  power  of  trying  the  heart,  and  there- 
fore will  not  say  this  is  'duplicity.'  But  there  is  a  mys- 
tery  about  the  matter  which  we  shall  not  attempt  to  un- 
veil. 

The  following  extract  from  their  weekly  paper,  'The 
Christian  Advocate  «fe  Journal,'  will  form  a  not  inappro- 
priate conclusion  to  the  whole.  The  author  of  the  ensu- 
ing statements  signs  his  name  G.  Coles.  He  was  the 
preacher  in  Poughkeepsie,  N.  Y.,  for  the  two  years  pre- 
vious to  April  20,  1835,  the  date  of  his  letter.  See  Jour, 
nal  for  May  8, 1835.  Mr  Coles  tells  us  that  at  the  com- 
mencement of  his  term,  two  years  previously,  the  whole 
number  of  members  was  about  400. 
Moved  away  without  certificate,  and  otherwise 

LOST  from  the  classes,  48 

Probationers  dropped,  29 

Members  expelled,  10 

Members  withdrawn,  5 

Total,  92 


342  APPKNDIX. 

Of  these  92,  be  it  remembered,  48  are  said  cither  to 
liave  removed  'without  certificate,'  (and  thus  are  out  of 
the  church,  being  excluded  from  other  circuits  by  the  Dis- 
cipline, p.  41,)  or  are  embraced  in  the  mysterious  desig- 
nation, 'LOST  from  the  classes'!  The  remaining  44  were 
'dropped'  as  unpromising, 'expelled'  as  unsavory,  or  with- 
drew in  disgust.  So  that  as  Mr.  Coles  himself  testifies, 
notwithstanding  the  church  had  received  an  accession  of 
177  persons  from  other  circuits  and  on  probation,  and 
there  had  been  only  18  deaths,  yet  the  whole  numUer  was 
LESS  by  just  17,  than  two  years  previously,  at  the  com- 
mencemeht  of  his  labors!  What  a  picture  is  this!  One 
hundred  (nearly)  separated  from  the  institutions  of  reli- 
gion,  bearing  the  mark  of  disgrace!  Nearly  one-fourth 
of  the  whole  Methodist  host  (supposing  the  prospeHty  of 
the  church  to  be  equally  great  elsewhere)  dismissed  un- 
der the  stigma  of  eccleaiaslical  dishonor  every  two  j'ears! 
By  the  last  returns  (in  1836)  they  reported  upwards  of 
650,000;  which,  by  the  foregouig  calculation,  would  give 
upwards  of  160,000  ex-communicants  every  two  years,  or 
more  than  80,000  annually!  Is  there  not  reason  to  fear 
that  the  light  which  so  shines  is  darkness? 


M 


